Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

What actually happened and who’s to blame

  • Commenters see classic buck‑passing: Mastercard blames processors, processors cite Mastercard “brand damage” rules, and Valve/itch say they were threatened with loss of processing.
  • Mastercard’s public line is “we allow all lawful purchases,” but its Rule 5.12.7 lets it block any “brand‑damaging” transaction at its “sole discretion,” which many view as a blank check.
  • Several people who’ve worked with adult payments insist Mastercard maintains non‑public keyword bans and that its statement is misleading at best.
  • An Australian anti‑porn group is widely believed (based on public letters and timelines) to have pressured card networks, which then squeezed Stripe/PayPal/Paysafe, who in turn pushed Valve and itch.

Financial chokepoints as de facto censorship

  • Strong theme: this is a “side-channel attack on democracy” where lawful content is removed via payment, hosting, or infra providers rather than law.
  • Payment networks form a global chokepoint: merchants must obey all card network rules, often without transparency or appeal; being cut off can kill a business.
  • Some compare this to prior episodes (Pornhub, OnlyFans, Operation Choke Point) where financial rails were used to police disfavored but often legal activity.

Law, free speech, and government pressure

  • One side says this is not a First Amendment issue: the Constitution binds government, not private firms; Mastercard can choose its customers.
  • Others argue that when a few firms control essential infrastructure and can be quietly leaned on by regulators, the distinction between state and private censorship becomes meaningless.
  • Disagreement over how much law is involved: some blame Australian obscenity rules and US AML/KYC; others note Steam already geo‑blocks by country and this went global anyway.

Alternatives and technical workarounds

  • Crypto is repeatedly raised (Bitcoin, Lightning, Monero, stablecoins), with pushback about usability, fees, volatility, and increasing regulation and bans on privacy coins.
  • Suggestions include: treating card networks as regulated common carriers, stronger antitrust enforcement, or building alternative rails (ACH/FedNow, SEPA‑style, Pix/UPI/Wero‑like systems).
  • Valve starting its own processor or bank is debated; regulatory and network‑effects hurdles are seen as enormous.

Debate over the content vs. the mechanism

  • Many commenters find rape/incest games repugnant and wouldn’t host them personally, but still oppose financial intermediaries deciding what legal content can exist.
  • Others argue there is no “right” to such material and are comfortable with networks refusing it; to them this is risk and ethics, not censorship.