5 ms·

Stripe has a history of shutting down legit businesses and blocking payouts of their rightfully earned income, whilst also profiting off those frozen funds by i

Stripe has a history of shutting down legit businesses and blocking payouts of their rightfully earned income, whilst also profiting off those frozen funds by investing it. Sad to see lemon squeezy acquired by stripe.

danielmarkbruce 2y ago
Stripe has a history of cutting off payments to businesses which are violating the TOS. Stripe's TOS is largely a result of rules in place by banks and credit card companies. If Stripe don't shut them off, they get shut off. To the extent they've made errors, I'd like to see you do better. The scale is enormous, there are fraudsters coming at you left and right. It's not an easy game to play.
- tonynator 2y ago
  The number one justification for cryptocurrency in my book, even if it's less safe or convenient or even has small fees. Your business being subject to the whims of payment processors is ludicrous. Even with this being the justification, they could just say they won't be working with the customer in the future, not literally steal their customer's already earned money.
  - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
    Find me a single example of where Stripe kept the money themselves. In some cases they are legally obliged to hold onto funds. The don't get to keep them. You are putting yourself at risk of a lawsuit.
    - tonynator 2y ago
      [dead]
  - sanswork 2y ago
    All you're doing is moving the risk from the business to the consumer with crypto which is why it will never succeed. Consumers like all the things businesses hate about credit cards because they can get their money back if something goes wrong and when it comes to payments the customer decides who wins.
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      Well said. We've offered for many years to our customers to pay by CC, bank transfer or Bitcoin. Exactly 0 people wanted to pay by Bitcoin, while the other two options are at about 50/50.
      - nwienert 2y ago
        What are you selling?
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        I don't want to go into details here, but it is something very traditional and unexciting that all kinds of people buy. We offered Bitcoin payment just as prominent as other forms of payment, but nobody was interested.
        qingcharles 2y ago
        How are you taking Bitcoin payments? Every time I'm forced to pay for something using crypto it ends up making me want to self-harm and I've been a dev for 40 years. When I have to try and talk friends and relatives through crypto payments it is insanely painful. Just the other day I was buying an NFT and I realized I bought the currency on Ethereum instead of Polygon. Coinbase didn't differentiate. Imagine trying to explain all this shit to your grandma.
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        In the first step, the customer would just select between card, bank transfer and Bitcoin. Nobody selected Bitcoin in the first step.
  - galdosdi 2y ago
    LOL. Being able to reverse transactions and freeze funds is a feature not a bug. With crypto you have no recourse when a criminal does criminal things or you make a mistake. Ransomware only started being a thing thanks to crypto, but governments could easily ban it (serious governments like US, China, Germany, that is) Crypto is useless for anyone but criminals. If you can't use the real, state controlled financial system, then you also can't use the real, state controlled property rights system. Who cares about being able to prove you own some bits if you are not protected by the law when you buy any actual tangible goods with those bits, like a house or a car or a business? Crypto is only useful when it's not needed (ie, you can use the state to enforce your physical property rights) and becomes useless once it's needed (you live in a corrupt or anarchist state that won't enforce your property rights over anything you can actually buy with the crypto) Crypto is becoming a form of government blind-eye-turned corruption, for carrying out corrupt financial practices with less immediate oversight and more ways to overcomplicate the logistics. It will probably cause a financial crisis one day, like in 2008, for the exact same reason complex derivatives did. I never take crypto jobs so my resume will stay clean when the house of cards falls down.
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      How does your comment read if you replace "crypto" with "foreign currency"?
      - galdosdi 2y ago
        You are probably unaware of this, but most foreign countries also have governments that enforce laws. It's not just an American thing, believe it or not. Hope this helps. Take care now.
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        I found it curious that many uses and abuses of crypto is the same as with foreign currency. But you seem to have killed your curiosity.
  - arcticbull 2y ago
    Instead you should advocate for payment network neutrality. Visa and MasterCard should be required by US law not to discriminate against transactions, and enforcement should move from the private sector to, well, law enforcement. Like with ACH/FedNow. That might actually get us somewhere productive.
    - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
      Terrible idea. Plus, banks aren't allowed to just close their eyes and allow all money movement via ACH.
      - arcticbull 2y ago
        Terrible idea on what basis? Why would it be bad to require all lawful transactions to be processed by an infrastructure provider? Private toll roads don't get to discriminate against traffic. Internet providers don't get to discriminate against traffic. Why should payment network providers? Once you're big enough and important enough, you're quasi-state.
        danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        On the basis of allowing the people who built the companies to deal with customers they want to deal with, rather than be forced to deal with every type of scumbag on earth. Toll roads change price based on type of vehicle and don't allow all types of vehicles. Discrimination. In most jurisdictions internet providers absolutely discriminate on traffic to help resolve congestion, they are allowed to discriminate for VOIP under various circumstances. Discrimination. Visa and Mastercard don't want a bunch of charge backs, some services are more prone to fraud than others, and they flat out don't want their brand associated with various things. Discrimination. With few exceptions (race, gender etc etc), discrimination is a net good for the world. People should be allowed to decide who they want to do business with, socialize with etc.
        arcticbull 2y ago
  - nailer 2y ago
    current generation blockchain networks will absolutely have lower fees than traditional finance
    - cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
      Current-generation blockchain networks also don’t seek to do what “traditional finance” does. The usual list of things that crypto enthusiasts point to tends to be mostly comprised of things that consumers actually want. The entire premise is different. Apples and oranges.
    - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
      No chance. This makes zero sense.
      - nailer 2y ago
        Er, it’s a fact. Anything post 2020 is a fraction of a cent.
        danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        For exactly what? Show the lowest cost provider in "traditional finance" and the cost using some blockchain for an end to end transaction that someone actually wants to do. What you are going to find is that the underlying cost structure for a few updates to a few relational dbs is about zero. The fees paid for some transactions having are a result of using the most convenient method possible. With a little bit of elbow grease you will find very cheap providers of everything in traditional finance, they'll just be a little more annoying to use.
        nailer 2y ago
        Sure: retail payments or international remittance - find the cheapest tradfi provider and we’ll go from there.
        2y ago
- djbusby 2y ago
  Stripe is selective about which cannabis ancillary businesses they work with. Selective/preferential usage of the TOS.
  - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
    Just like any contract, every single possible circumstance cannot be enumerated and at some point a judgement call is required.
    - djbusby 2y ago
      Two identical business models (software) should either both be supported or both be rejected. They are pretty clearly playing favourites with their VC funded friends.
      - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        It has nothing to do with business model. Get out the tome that is the Visa network rules and try to figure it out. It's not some simple thing.
- devwastaken 2y ago
  Stripe is not at any risk of having services cut by payment processors. They can leverage an excellent case against them if so. It's time they and the others get together and dunk on Mastercard before they decide to eat the whole pie.
  - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
    Go work in payments a while and get a clue. They are constantly at risk from the card networks, banks, regulators.
    - devwastaken 2y ago
      Then time for them to group up and change the game. Not going to make excuses for corps. It's their responsibility to push, not mine to apologize for them.
      - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        The game is working out well for them. Why would they want to change it? What's next? Lebron should push for rule changes that make it easier for short guys?
        devwastaken 2y ago
        Advocating against yourself.
        danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        Nope, you just don't understand the situation at all.
        devwastaken 2y ago
        Change doesn't come from placation of an existing system.
alphabettsy 2y ago
I haven’t seen this happen to a legit business yet. Each time I’ve read about the business has been shady and violates the TOS. I don’t care for so much consolidation though.
- tonynator 2y ago
  [dead]
- BoorishBears 2y ago
  At least half the times I've seen it someone "super apologetic" comes out and fixes the issue, so not sure how that tracks.
gjsman-1000 2y ago
> Stripe has a history of shutting down legit businesses and blocking payouts of their rightfully earned income, whilst also profiting off those frozen funds by investing it. Almost every case I've seen, it's almost always because they were dabbling with NSFW, Cannabis, or another card-network-restricted category. And when you confront them about their story, they almost always respond with weasel wording: "It wasn't really NSFW, or it was only a little NSFW, or it's not my responsibility if my users use it for NSFW..." It's also not like this is buried in the Terms of Service with ambiguous legalese. Stripe has a pretty beautifully-formatted page clearly saying what they are not OK with. https://stripe.com/legal/restricted-businesses https://stripe.com/legal/restricted-businesses
- jiggawatts 2y ago
  Most of it I get, but... "Genital prosthetics"!? What on Earth?
  - cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
    As someone that isn’t working in payment processing, it’s no surprise that you don’t get all of it. Every single thing about these lists always reeks of ‘this has been put together reactively, over time, based on experience’. But it’s so cool and trendy and complain about this stuff on HN and similar, everyone just elects to forego critical thinking for a little bit.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- tonynator 2y ago
  [dead]

danielmarkbruce 2y ago

Stripe has a history of cutting off payments to businesses which are violating the TOS. Stripe's TOS is largely a result of rules in place by banks and credit card companies. If Stripe don't shut them off, they get shut off. To the extent they've made errors, I'd like to see you do better. The scale is enormous, there are fraudsters coming at you left and right. It's not an easy game to play.

tonynator 2y ago
The number one justification for cryptocurrency in my book, even if it's less safe or convenient or even has small fees. Your business being subject to the whims of payment processors is ludicrous. Even with this being the justification, they could just say they won't be working with the customer in the future, not literally steal their customer's already earned money.
- danielmarkbruce 2y ago
  Find me a single example of where Stripe kept the money themselves. In some cases they are legally obliged to hold onto funds. The don't get to keep them. You are putting yourself at risk of a lawsuit.
  - tonynator 2y ago
    [dead]
- sanswork 2y ago
  All you're doing is moving the risk from the business to the consumer with crypto which is why it will never succeed. Consumers like all the things businesses hate about credit cards because they can get their money back if something goes wrong and when it comes to payments the customer decides who wins.
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    Well said. We've offered for many years to our customers to pay by CC, bank transfer or Bitcoin. Exactly 0 people wanted to pay by Bitcoin, while the other two options are at about 50/50.
    - nwienert 2y ago
      What are you selling?
      - carlosjobim 2y ago
        I don't want to go into details here, but it is something very traditional and unexciting that all kinds of people buy. We offered Bitcoin payment just as prominent as other forms of payment, but nobody was interested.
        qingcharles 2y ago
        How are you taking Bitcoin payments? Every time I'm forced to pay for something using crypto it ends up making me want to self-harm and I've been a dev for 40 years. When I have to try and talk friends and relatives through crypto payments it is insanely painful. Just the other day I was buying an NFT and I realized I bought the currency on Ethereum instead of Polygon. Coinbase didn't differentiate. Imagine trying to explain all this shit to your grandma.
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        In the first step, the customer would just select between card, bank transfer and Bitcoin. Nobody selected Bitcoin in the first step.
- galdosdi 2y ago
  LOL. Being able to reverse transactions and freeze funds is a feature not a bug. With crypto you have no recourse when a criminal does criminal things or you make a mistake. Ransomware only started being a thing thanks to crypto, but governments could easily ban it (serious governments like US, China, Germany, that is) Crypto is useless for anyone but criminals. If you can't use the real, state controlled financial system, then you also can't use the real, state controlled property rights system. Who cares about being able to prove you own some bits if you are not protected by the law when you buy any actual tangible goods with those bits, like a house or a car or a business? Crypto is only useful when it's not needed (ie, you can use the state to enforce your physical property rights) and becomes useless once it's needed (you live in a corrupt or anarchist state that won't enforce your property rights over anything you can actually buy with the crypto) Crypto is becoming a form of government blind-eye-turned corruption, for carrying out corrupt financial practices with less immediate oversight and more ways to overcomplicate the logistics. It will probably cause a financial crisis one day, like in 2008, for the exact same reason complex derivatives did. I never take crypto jobs so my resume will stay clean when the house of cards falls down.
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    How does your comment read if you replace "crypto" with "foreign currency"?
    - galdosdi 2y ago
      You are probably unaware of this, but most foreign countries also have governments that enforce laws. It's not just an American thing, believe it or not. Hope this helps. Take care now.
      - carlosjobim 2y ago
        I found it curious that many uses and abuses of crypto is the same as with foreign currency. But you seem to have killed your curiosity.
- arcticbull 2y ago
  Instead you should advocate for payment network neutrality. Visa and MasterCard should be required by US law not to discriminate against transactions, and enforcement should move from the private sector to, well, law enforcement. Like with ACH/FedNow. That might actually get us somewhere productive.
  - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
    Terrible idea. Plus, banks aren't allowed to just close their eyes and allow all money movement via ACH.
    - arcticbull 2y ago
      Terrible idea on what basis? Why would it be bad to require all lawful transactions to be processed by an infrastructure provider? Private toll roads don't get to discriminate against traffic. Internet providers don't get to discriminate against traffic. Why should payment network providers? Once you're big enough and important enough, you're quasi-state.
      - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        On the basis of allowing the people who built the companies to deal with customers they want to deal with, rather than be forced to deal with every type of scumbag on earth. Toll roads change price based on type of vehicle and don't allow all types of vehicles. Discrimination. In most jurisdictions internet providers absolutely discriminate on traffic to help resolve congestion, they are allowed to discriminate for VOIP under various circumstances. Discrimination. Visa and Mastercard don't want a bunch of charge backs, some services are more prone to fraud than others, and they flat out don't want their brand associated with various things. Discrimination. With few exceptions (race, gender etc etc), discrimination is a net good for the world. People should be allowed to decide who they want to do business with, socialize with etc.
        arcticbull 2y ago
- nailer 2y ago
  current generation blockchain networks will absolutely have lower fees than traditional finance
  - cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
    Current-generation blockchain networks also don’t seek to do what “traditional finance” does. The usual list of things that crypto enthusiasts point to tends to be mostly comprised of things that consumers actually want. The entire premise is different. Apples and oranges.
  - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
    No chance. This makes zero sense.
    - nailer 2y ago
      Er, it’s a fact. Anything post 2020 is a fraction of a cent.
      - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        For exactly what? Show the lowest cost provider in "traditional finance" and the cost using some blockchain for an end to end transaction that someone actually wants to do. What you are going to find is that the underlying cost structure for a few updates to a few relational dbs is about zero. The fees paid for some transactions having are a result of using the most convenient method possible. With a little bit of elbow grease you will find very cheap providers of everything in traditional finance, they'll just be a little more annoying to use.
        nailer 2y ago
        Sure: retail payments or international remittance - find the cheapest tradfi provider and we’ll go from there.
        2y ago
djbusby 2y ago
Stripe is selective about which cannabis ancillary businesses they work with. Selective/preferential usage of the TOS.
- danielmarkbruce 2y ago
  Just like any contract, every single possible circumstance cannot be enumerated and at some point a judgement call is required.
  - djbusby 2y ago
    Two identical business models (software) should either both be supported or both be rejected. They are pretty clearly playing favourites with their VC funded friends.
    - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
      It has nothing to do with business model. Get out the tome that is the Visa network rules and try to figure it out. It's not some simple thing.
devwastaken 2y ago
Stripe is not at any risk of having services cut by payment processors. They can leverage an excellent case against them if so. It's time they and the others get together and dunk on Mastercard before they decide to eat the whole pie.
- danielmarkbruce 2y ago
  Go work in payments a while and get a clue. They are constantly at risk from the card networks, banks, regulators.
  - devwastaken 2y ago
    Then time for them to group up and change the game. Not going to make excuses for corps. It's their responsibility to push, not mine to apologize for them.
    - danielmarkbruce 2y ago
      The game is working out well for them. Why would they want to change it? What's next? Lebron should push for rule changes that make it easier for short guys?
      - devwastaken 2y ago
        Advocating against yourself.
        danielmarkbruce 2y ago
        Nope, you just don't understand the situation at all.
        devwastaken 2y ago
        Change doesn't come from placation of an existing system.

alphabettsy 2y ago

I haven’t seen this happen to a legit business yet. Each time I’ve read about the business has been shady and violates the TOS. I don’t care for so much consolidation though.

tonynator 2y ago
[dead]
BoorishBears 2y ago
At least half the times I've seen it someone "super apologetic" comes out and fixes the issue, so not sure how that tracks.

gjsman-1000 2y ago

> Stripe has a history of shutting down legit businesses and blocking payouts of their rightfully earned income, whilst also profiting off those frozen funds by investing it. Almost every case I've seen, it's almost always because they were dabbling with NSFW, Cannabis, or another card-network-restricted category. And when you confront them about their story, they almost always respond with weasel wording: "It wasn't really NSFW, or it was only a little NSFW, or it's not my responsibility if my users use it for NSFW..." It's also not like this is buried in the Terms of Service with ambiguous legalese. Stripe has a pretty beautifully-formatted page clearly saying what they are not OK with. https://stripe.com/legal/restricted-businesses https://stripe.com/legal/restricted-businesses

jiggawatts 2y ago
Most of it I get, but... "Genital prosthetics"!? What on Earth?
- cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
  As someone that isn’t working in payment processing, it’s no surprise that you don’t get all of it. Every single thing about these lists always reeks of ‘this has been put together reactively, over time, based on experience’. But it’s so cool and trendy and complain about this stuff on HN and similar, everyone just elects to forego critical thinking for a little bit.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
tonynator 2y ago
[dead]