15 ms·

> As such, they require such websites (merchants) to prove that individuals in such videos are of legal age (no minors in the videos, because if so - that's ill

> As such, they require such websites (merchants) to prove that individuals in such videos are of legal age (no minors in the videos, because if so - that's illegal and horrible). > > This seems totally fair, commendable and hard to disagree with - if you ask me. Indeed! Though it's important to note that it's more than just that (as important as age verification of performers is!). Mastercard and Visa are also acting as de facto controllers of what is acceptable content. In other words, not just who is participating, but what is being done. For example, "… blood is banned, even blood obviously made of ketchup. This is a disaster for vampire porn, which is akin to a forbidden good on the internet." That's not my thing, but I also don't think Mastercard and Visa should be the ones who regulate that.

duskwuff 4y ago
Yep. The problem is that the credit card issuers' regulations go way beyond determining that the content being purchased is legal, and well into judging the morality of that content. Credit card processors go even further; many of them forbid sales of adult products and services entirely.
- quest88 4y ago
  I don't believe that. These companies want to make money and would love to make more. They also don't want to lose money, so they find ways to decrease risk. Their lawyers probably tell them what's risky and draw the line there. If you don't want them making these judgements then voters should tell their regulator exactly what is and isn't ok.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    > then voters should tell their regulator exactly what is and isn't ok. like what, a list of allowed porn Ganres? thats not making any sence.
    - quest88 4y ago
      And neither does regulation preventing purchasing porn either. But be explicit about what’s ok and what’s not if you’re going to regulate it. Otherwise companies decide for themselves and we end up here.
theturtletalks 4y ago
Yes, OP also misses the fact that Visa and MC can gate-keep legal activities as well. Selling smoking accessories is legal under US law, but good luck getting a payment processor that'll let you sell those goods online. You can get a high risk processor, but they hold your funds for longer, charge a higher rate, and you can lose processing ability at any time. If you're established, Visa and MC will make exceptions, but who decided to make Visa and MC the deciders on what people can and cannot sell. That's what US laws are for. In my opinion, this is the only use case for crypto that I can see playing out, decentralized payments. Sure fees maybe higher, but at least a private company can't restrict what you can sell online while whitelisting some competitors.
- KennyBlanken 4y ago
  > Sure fees maybe higher, but at least a private company can't restrict what you can sell online while whitelisting some competitors. Until exchanges turn around and do the same thing as Visa/Mastercard once they have enough market share...and they aren't subject to anywhere near as many regulations.
  - theturtletalks 4y ago
    Sure that could happen, but I'd hope there's enough competition in crypto payment processing that keeps them honest. Visa and MC have too big of a strong hold right now.
- tiffanyh 4y ago
  > OP also misses the fact that Visa and MC can gate-keep legal activities as well. Selling smoking accessories is legal under US law, but good luck getting a payment processor that'll let you sell those goods online Visa & MC are not processors.
  - theturtletalks 4y ago
    Yes, but Stripe or Paypal adhere to their rules. Visa and MC are the reason those processors don't allow high risk businesses. For example, OnlyFans last year nearly banned adult content because their processor was going to drop them. Visa/MC were blamed for that, but they ended up making an exception. If you go out to build an OnlyFans alternative, you won't get a processor.
robonerd 4y ago
Vampire fetish stuff seems harmless to me, but I'm not surprised Visa and Mastercard don't want to get into the weeds of determining the difference between special effects and actual self-harm / mutilation. There is a whole lot of gray area in between there (piercing fetish, etc), but they probably feel compelled to draw a line somewhere. Whether or not the video seems to show blood (real or fake) seems like a criteria that can be judged with reasonable objectivity, and errors on the side of caution.

duskwuff 4y ago

Yep. The problem is that the credit card issuers' regulations go way beyond determining that the content being purchased is legal, and well into judging the morality of that content. Credit card processors go even further; many of them forbid sales of adult products and services entirely.

quest88 4y ago
I don't believe that. These companies want to make money and would love to make more. They also don't want to lose money, so they find ways to decrease risk. Their lawyers probably tell them what's risky and draw the line there. If you don't want them making these judgements then voters should tell their regulator exactly what is and isn't ok.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > then voters should tell their regulator exactly what is and isn't ok. like what, a list of allowed porn Ganres? thats not making any sence.
  - quest88 4y ago
    And neither does regulation preventing purchasing porn either. But be explicit about what’s ok and what’s not if you’re going to regulate it. Otherwise companies decide for themselves and we end up here.

theturtletalks 4y ago

Yes, OP also misses the fact that Visa and MC can gate-keep legal activities as well. Selling smoking accessories is legal under US law, but good luck getting a payment processor that'll let you sell those goods online. You can get a high risk processor, but they hold your funds for longer, charge a higher rate, and you can lose processing ability at any time. If you're established, Visa and MC will make exceptions, but who decided to make Visa and MC the deciders on what people can and cannot sell. That's what US laws are for. In my opinion, this is the only use case for crypto that I can see playing out, decentralized payments. Sure fees maybe higher, but at least a private company can't restrict what you can sell online while whitelisting some competitors.

KennyBlanken 4y ago
> Sure fees maybe higher, but at least a private company can't restrict what you can sell online while whitelisting some competitors. Until exchanges turn around and do the same thing as Visa/Mastercard once they have enough market share...and they aren't subject to anywhere near as many regulations.
- theturtletalks 4y ago
  Sure that could happen, but I'd hope there's enough competition in crypto payment processing that keeps them honest. Visa and MC have too big of a strong hold right now.
tiffanyh 4y ago
> OP also misses the fact that Visa and MC can gate-keep legal activities as well. Selling smoking accessories is legal under US law, but good luck getting a payment processor that'll let you sell those goods online Visa & MC are not processors.
- theturtletalks 4y ago
  Yes, but Stripe or Paypal adhere to their rules. Visa and MC are the reason those processors don't allow high risk businesses. For example, OnlyFans last year nearly banned adult content because their processor was going to drop them. Visa/MC were blamed for that, but they ended up making an exception. If you go out to build an OnlyFans alternative, you won't get a processor.

robonerd 4y ago

Vampire fetish stuff seems harmless to me, but I'm not surprised Visa and Mastercard don't want to get into the weeds of determining the difference between special effects and actual self-harm / mutilation. There is a whole lot of gray area in between there (piercing fetish, etc), but they probably feel compelled to draw a line somewhere. Whether or not the video seems to show blood (real or fake) seems like a criteria that can be judged with reasonable objectivity, and errors on the side of caution.