9 ms·
> PayPal has demanded that we monitor data traffic as well as all our customers’ files for illegal content. They have also asked us to provide them with detaile
by josteink 10y ago
> PayPal has demanded that we monitor data traffic as well as all our customers’ files for illegal content. They have also asked us to provide them with detailed statistics about the files types of our customers sync and share on https://app.seafile.de https://app.seafile.de
That's a pretty big WTF right there.
I know PayPal has a on overall pretty scummy reputation, but I still I cannot imagine PayPal doing this because they themselves think they'll benefit from this data.
To me this seems like a demand which comes "upstream" from above PayPal, from its payment providers (VISA, MasterCard, American Express, etc). Would I be overly paranoid to imagine these demands and claims are the result of lobbing by entities like RIAA and MPAA? They do have a history for blocking payments to known pirate-friendly services after all.
And as such, they clearly have too much power, and there needs to be some anti-discriminatory financial regulation to stop business-hostile practices like this from being lobbied and put in place.
Because this is just madness.
- nl 10y agoI think that there have been issues like this for porn sites in the past, because they have significant chargeback rates - to the point where man payment processes won't deal with them.
- MichaelBurge 10y agoI've run into this issue in the past, but I also can't blame them. Has everyone forgotten the early 2000s when porn sites would use 0-days to embed dialers in your computer to rack up huge dial-up charges? Or offer you 'trial' memberships and make it very very difficult to cancel? Visa and MasterCard eventually stepped in and made the banks do extra legwork for the porn sites. That had to leave a bad impression on them. It's not even really the chargebacks: You'll still be considered high-risk even if you can demonstrate having very few chargebacks. It's more that you're lumped into a pool with some very bad actors in an industry that has a bad history.
- nl 10y agoOh, I agree entirely. I suspect the "File Sharing" sites may have the same issue. I wonder how many people charge-back the payment for "Download GoT S05E01.mp4 here"?
- makomk 10y agoFile sharing sites are definitely scam central. There are entire sites built around advertising pirate downloads of niche content via pay-only download sites which are actually just files filled with null bytes, then profiting from the referral fees.
- gcb0 10y agoyou're mixing up a lot there. porn sites either charged you or installed dialers, not both. and the charge backs on the legit ones were so high because the operators for the scammy ones needed to sign up, download everything, get his money back, and serve you the stolen content.
- cm2187 10y agoWelcome to the world of financial regulations! You may have not realised but banks and any financial institutions have been deputised by the regulators to be the financial police. They need to ensure that none of their client use financial services to commit crimes or launder the proceeds of a crime, under the penalty of heavy (up to multi billions) fines. Particularly in the US. I am pretty sure this is what is forcing paypal to do this. And also why I wish good luck to startups who think they will disrupt this massively over regulated industry.
- ckastner 10y ago> Welcome to the world of financial regulations! > You may have not realised but banks and any financial institutions have been deputised by the regulators to be the financial police. They need to endure that none of their client use financial services to commit crimes or launder the proceeds of a crime, under the penalty of heavy (up to multi billions) fines. Particularly in the US. While I fully agree with this statement, PayPal's actions here seem excessive even by the broadest interpretations of anti-money-laundering regulations. Furthermore, AML regulations target a specific set of transactions and/or individuals. "Monitoring all traffic for illegal content" is a vague statement that could mean anything. Illegal where? Illegal how? Edit: I forgot to mention: PayPal operates as a credit institution (ie, a bank) within the EU, so the strict AML regulations the parent alluded to apply to it directly.
- cynicalkane 10y agoIn the US, at least, AML regulations are whatever the regulators say they are.
- mcherm 10y agoI call BS on that. It is true that banks will go a long way to try to satisfy banking regulators. But unless you have some evidence I am simply unwilling to believe that banking regulators can make up any restrictions they like without regard for the actual requirements of federal law.
- luispedrocoelho 10y agoRegulations will probably come in the form of making these types of checks mandatory. See, for example, how US Senators pressure payment providers to check up on whether their customers may be profiting from illegal file-sharing: https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/judiciary-chair-leahy-urges-visa-mastercard-to-recommit-their-efforts-to-address-illegal-activity-online https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/judiciary-chair-leahy-urg... If Dropbox-style hash checking of files could be seen as the standard in the industry, I can see how failing to do that could be seen by a court as potentially negligent.
- anonymousDan 10y agoCould be a good argument for client side encryption.
- alsetmusic 10y agoThere was a sherif (or other law enforcement type) who tried to intimidate credit card processors for supporting online sex trade via Backpage last year. A judge stepped in and said he was overreaching (Backpage has content that is legal as well). First link from a Google search: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/12/backpage_v_dart_a_judge_smacks_down_a_sheriff_s_intimidation_campaign_against.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/1...
- indlebe 10y agoPaypal has been acting like this of their own accord for some time now. More than a decade ago a friend of mine sold cold filter bags for herbal extracts online using Paypal. The product was completely legal and didn't allude in any way that it was designed for illegal use (read marijuana hash making). Paypal decided, about 9 months in, to close their account in a similar fashion to the service here and deny them access to thousands in funds, touting an irrelevant bong sales ban in a state somewhere in the US (he was in Canada). It took years for him to get the seized funds back from Paypal. I try to boycott them unless absolutely needed.