6 ms·

Click on the article link at the top of this page and find out. Let me quote the article for you: > In a statement provided to PC Gamer, Valve said that it had

Click on the article link at the top of this page and find out. Let me quote the article for you: > In a statement provided to PC Gamer, Valve said that it had tried to work things out with Mastercard directly prior to removing the games, and suggested that Mastercard did have at least an indirect influence on the outcome. > "Mastercard did not communicate with Valve directly, despite our request to do so," a Valve representative said. "Mastercard communicated with payment processors and their acquiring banks. Payment processors communicated this with Valve, and we replied by outlining Steam’s policy since 2018 of attempting to distribute games that are legal for distribution. > "Payment processors rejected this, and specifically cited Mastercard’s Rule 5.12.7 and risk to the Mastercard brand."

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
This text is also consistent with Valve making a determination, checking with payment processors and not being told no. (Versus the payment processors reaching out to Valve first.) Like yes, there is a problem with Mastercard. But I want to know this isn’t Valve having complied with some activists trying to cover their tracks.
- nemomarx 1y ago
  As far as it goes, collective shout claimed Valve didn't respond to them and that's why they complained to MC visa about it. They even mention how many calls they made to them to get the complaint heard. So everyone would have to be pretty invested in this show for it to have originated from Valve?
  - Maken 1y ago
    Which means Collective Shout didn't have any legal weight behind their demands.
    - nemomarx 1y ago
      Of course - they've never invoked a legal justification. What they seem to be leaning on is basically "we can create bad press about you supporting payments for X", promising headlines like "MasterCard is paying for women to be beaten and raped!" or other sensational nonsense.
    - shagie 1y ago
      They're based out of Australia and so have the Australian porn laws behind them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_Australia#Illegal_pornography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_Australia#Illeg... > Some types of pornography (both real and fictitious) are technically illegal in Australia and if classified would be rated RC and therefore banned in Australia. This includes any pornography depicting violent BDSM, incest, paedophilia, zoophilia, certain extreme fetishes (such as golden showers) and/or indicators of youth (such as wearing a school uniform). https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/pornography-laws-australia https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/pornography-la... https://www.kptlegal.com.au/resources/knowledge/pornography-law/ https://www.kptlegal.com.au/resources/knowledge/pornography-...
      - aranelsurion 1y ago
        Steam already has the ability to block certain countries and regions from buying specific products. IIRC many of the adult games were already banned in the German region for example. If it was about the laws, at worst Valve could block Australian users from buying adult content and that would be it.
        shagie 1y ago
        ... and if Valve and Itch had blocked content that was illegal in Australia before Collective Shout weaponized the Australian laws, we wouldn't have heard about it beyond it showing up in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_in_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_in_... From the Valve rules: 6. Content that violates the laws of any jurisdiction in which it will be available
        amiga386 1y ago
        1. Everything on your banned list that Steam sells was already banned in Australia (you can tell by looking it up on SteamDB and noticing it has "n/a" for the Australian price e.g. https://steamdb.info/app/2456420/ https://steamdb.info/app/2456420/) 2. Collective Shout aren't weaponising Australian laws in this case - those only apply in Australia. At best they could get games banned in Australia by drawing the state censor's attention to them. What Collective Shout did was weaponise American corporations fear of negative publicity by calling them repeatedly and threatening them with negative campaigning, and as a result got games banned in countries they don't live in, over and above the say-so of the people who do live in those countries, and the laws of those countries allowing them to purchase such games.
- amiga386 1y ago
  If this is just evil old Valve, why did itch.io - a site founded on openness and the right to sell adult-only games, especially if they cover LGBT themes, tell everyone that their payment processors also want them not to offer adult-only games? Which is more likely: 1. Porn-hating, sex-hating, LGBT-hating activist group from Australia bombards Mastercard with complaints that Valve and Itch are selling adult games. Mastercard reminds its payment processors not to bring shame on The Mark. Valve's and Itch's payment processors tell them not to sell adult games. 2. Porn-hating, sex-hating, LGBT-hating activist group from Australia bombards Mastercard with complaints that Valve and Itch are selling adult games. Valve and Itch agree with these harpies and remove their revenue streams and support for developers (because they hate revenue and hate supporting their developers; they'd much rather align with moral prudes from Australia in order to lose money and abandon the people who make them that money), then they sneakily pin the blame on Mastercard. Valve and Itch also use telepathy to know Collective Shout's desires, which they agree with, to ban games precisely at the time Collective Shout are calling up Mastercard, in order for it to be Collective Shout -> Valve/Itch rather than Collective Shout -> Mastercard -> Payment processors -> Valve/Itch
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > why did itch.io - a site founded on openness and the right to sell adult-only games, especially if they cover LGBT themes, tell everyone that their payment processors also want them not to offer adult-only games? Thank you, this is the context I was missing.
  - jfyi 1y ago
    What is more likely is the processors made the decision themselves and cited Mastercard's rule without interacting with Mastercard. If Mastercard cared about this stuff then processors like CCBill wouldn't exist. The absurd amount of money that porn brings in on the internet would dry up over night. This was a decision made by paysafe and paypall and so far they are the only ones not getting the blame pinned on them. Itch: Our processors told us to do it. Mastercard: That is correct, we weren't involved. Half of Hacker News: MASTERCARD AND VISA!!!!!! The other half: VALVE AND ITCH!!!!!! Paysafe and Paypall: Lol

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

This text is also consistent with Valve making a determination, checking with payment processors and not being told no. (Versus the payment processors reaching out to Valve first.) Like yes, there is a problem with Mastercard. But I want to know this isn’t Valve having complied with some activists trying to cover their tracks.

nemomarx 1y ago
As far as it goes, collective shout claimed Valve didn't respond to them and that's why they complained to MC visa about it. They even mention how many calls they made to them to get the complaint heard. So everyone would have to be pretty invested in this show for it to have originated from Valve?
- Maken 1y ago
  Which means Collective Shout didn't have any legal weight behind their demands.
  - nemomarx 1y ago
    Of course - they've never invoked a legal justification. What they seem to be leaning on is basically "we can create bad press about you supporting payments for X", promising headlines like "MasterCard is paying for women to be beaten and raped!" or other sensational nonsense.
  - shagie 1y ago
    They're based out of Australia and so have the Australian porn laws behind them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_Australia#Illegal_pornography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_Australia#Illeg... > Some types of pornography (both real and fictitious) are technically illegal in Australia and if classified would be rated RC and therefore banned in Australia. This includes any pornography depicting violent BDSM, incest, paedophilia, zoophilia, certain extreme fetishes (such as golden showers) and/or indicators of youth (such as wearing a school uniform). https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/pornography-laws-australia https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/pornography-la... https://www.kptlegal.com.au/resources/knowledge/pornography-law/ https://www.kptlegal.com.au/resources/knowledge/pornography-...
    - aranelsurion 1y ago
      Steam already has the ability to block certain countries and regions from buying specific products. IIRC many of the adult games were already banned in the German region for example. If it was about the laws, at worst Valve could block Australian users from buying adult content and that would be it.
      - shagie 1y ago
        ... and if Valve and Itch had blocked content that was illegal in Australia before Collective Shout weaponized the Australian laws, we wouldn't have heard about it beyond it showing up in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_in_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_in_... From the Valve rules: 6. Content that violates the laws of any jurisdiction in which it will be available
        amiga386 1y ago
        1. Everything on your banned list that Steam sells was already banned in Australia (you can tell by looking it up on SteamDB and noticing it has "n/a" for the Australian price e.g. https://steamdb.info/app/2456420/ https://steamdb.info/app/2456420/) 2. Collective Shout aren't weaponising Australian laws in this case - those only apply in Australia. At best they could get games banned in Australia by drawing the state censor's attention to them. What Collective Shout did was weaponise American corporations fear of negative publicity by calling them repeatedly and threatening them with negative campaigning, and as a result got games banned in countries they don't live in, over and above the say-so of the people who do live in those countries, and the laws of those countries allowing them to purchase such games.
amiga386 1y ago
If this is just evil old Valve, why did itch.io - a site founded on openness and the right to sell adult-only games, especially if they cover LGBT themes, tell everyone that their payment processors also want them not to offer adult-only games? Which is more likely: 1. Porn-hating, sex-hating, LGBT-hating activist group from Australia bombards Mastercard with complaints that Valve and Itch are selling adult games. Mastercard reminds its payment processors not to bring shame on The Mark. Valve's and Itch's payment processors tell them not to sell adult games. 2. Porn-hating, sex-hating, LGBT-hating activist group from Australia bombards Mastercard with complaints that Valve and Itch are selling adult games. Valve and Itch agree with these harpies and remove their revenue streams and support for developers (because they hate revenue and hate supporting their developers; they'd much rather align with moral prudes from Australia in order to lose money and abandon the people who make them that money), then they sneakily pin the blame on Mastercard. Valve and Itch also use telepathy to know Collective Shout's desires, which they agree with, to ban games precisely at the time Collective Shout are calling up Mastercard, in order for it to be Collective Shout -> Valve/Itch rather than Collective Shout -> Mastercard -> Payment processors -> Valve/Itch
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > why did itch.io - a site founded on openness and the right to sell adult-only games, especially if they cover LGBT themes, tell everyone that their payment processors also want them not to offer adult-only games? Thank you, this is the context I was missing.
- jfyi 1y ago
  What is more likely is the processors made the decision themselves and cited Mastercard's rule without interacting with Mastercard. If Mastercard cared about this stuff then processors like CCBill wouldn't exist. The absurd amount of money that porn brings in on the internet would dry up over night. This was a decision made by paysafe and paypall and so far they are the only ones not getting the blame pinned on them. Itch: Our processors told us to do it. Mastercard: That is correct, we weren't involved. Half of Hacker News: MASTERCARD AND VISA!!!!!! The other half: VALVE AND ITCH!!!!!! Paysafe and Paypall: Lol