Updated: 8/1/2025 4:18 p.m. ET: In a statement to Kotaku, a spokesperson for Valve said that while Mastercard did not communicate with it directly, concerns did come through payment processor and banking intermediaries. They said payment processors rejected Valve’s current guidelines for moderating illegal content on Steam, citing Mastercard’s Rule 5.12.7.
“Mastercard did not communicate with Valve directly, despite our request to do so,” Valve’s statement sent over email to Kotaku reads. “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.”
Rule 5.12.7 states, “A Merchant must not submit to its Acquirer, and a Customer must not submit to the Interchange System, any Transaction that is illegal, or in the sole discretion of the Corporation, may damage the goodwill of the Corporation or reflect negatively on the Marks.”
It goes on, “The sale of a product or service, including an image, which is patently offensive and lacks serious artistic value (such as, by way of example and not limitation, images of nonconsensual sexual behavior, sexual exploitation of a minor, nonconsensual mutilation of a person or body part, and bestiality), or any other material that the Corporation deems unacceptable to sell in connection with a Mark.”
Violations of rule 5.12.7 can result in fines, audits, or companies being dropped by the payment processors.
Brilliant, just make your rules vague and force everyone else down the chain to self-censor. Surely this will result in the best outcome.
Fucking mastercard
It’s not even that vague.
Valve basically said: “we are not doing anything illegal”.
To which mastercard responded: “yeah but you’re making us look bad, so tough”.
I don’t think you read this properly. Mastercard didn’t respond at all.
Of course they did.
They just did so from behind a veil of plausible deniability.
You think a citatation of a specific mastercard contract clause came from a concerned partner?
A lawyer for a processor like PayPal or Stripe could easily have gone “uh, the Mastercard contract clause prohibits this”.
And PayPal is well known for doing shitty things, so it wouldn’t surprise me.
Maybe.
But Valve asked mastercard directly.
A lack of a response is a also a response, in this case essentially an endorsement of whatever their partner was telling Valve.
So you think Valve is lying?
What?
deleted by creator
Did you not read literally the first line?
Yes.
Plausible deniability.
“Oh so sorry that wasn’t us, one of our partners just overzealously applied our policies”
You seem to have forgotten what we were discussing, which was that Mastercard didn’t say anything.
Removed by mod
which could be just anything.
NugganMastercard has decided the following things are abominations, and are therefore unacceptable to sell:A few of those even have actual real live victims, unlike video game porn. This whole debacle is truly absurd.
These comments are what is absurd ngl.
Get a grip.
wat
Whoat?
Obviously our solution here is to send a pissed off bard to beat up Mastercard, then.
If they just wanted to follow the law, they could have left it at “don’t sell anything illegal” without all the extra “brand damage” nonsense.
Up to the third comma, yes, but all the rest seems to go beyond that pretty arbitrarily.
When they say anything that “may damage the goodwill of the corporation”, and qualify that with “in the sole discretion of the Corporation” that just means “anything we don’t want to be associated with, and we will be the judge of that”.
That’s what makes it so vague, how is a Merchant or an Acquirer supposed to know what Mastercard might find damaging to the goodwill? They have to guess, or use trial and error*. Most will just err on the side of caution, which means customers get blocked from even more purchases, just to be safe.
* Or talk to Mastercard, which Valve apparently tried, but they wouldn’t respond.
Looks like MasterCard is going to have to ban MasterCard because of all the damage they’ve done to MasterCard’s goodwill.
Whose law? The US? UK? Netherlands? Japan? Or Singapore?
That’s why it’s vague.
It’s much worse than that. How they word it is “if it may damage the public image of mastercard”. And they don’t review the content, they review the means used to prevent the damage to their brand.
So valve doesn’t even need to have anything that actually damage mastercard brand, it just need to be that mastercard is not comfortable enough with the measures used to prevent it.
Like buying anything would actually damage the brand of Mastercard. It’s such a nonsensical excuse that I’m surprised nobody laughed in their face.
Yeah, right up until assholes start posting “MASTERCARD SELLS SMUT INCEST HENTAI GAMES” on TikTok. Then it’s a problem, and MasterCard considers that damaging to the brand.
There’s really nothing stopping anyone from posting that right now. That’s the quality level of most of the online content nowadays.
That’s my point. They are posting it, and MasterCard does consider it harmful to the brand, so now we’re here.
Except that’s entirely false. Even now they are pretending they do nothing, it’s the intermediaries who force things.
Mastercard sells absolutely nothing. And they have no responsibility for anything sold. And no one ever thought it was mastercard selling or even allowing to sell illegal things.
In fact, most people will believe no one sound of mind will buy something illegal with a credit card because mastercard and the likes will give your identity to the police.
So it’s not about illegal things, and it’s not about their image.
No, the rules don’t (that’s why it’s been fine for 7 years), and you used a derogatory term so cry harder about your downvotes.
please sir may I have another