←back to thread

728 points freedomben | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.87s | source
Show context
maxbond ◴[] No.44611358[source]
Why do payment processors do stuff like this? Is there some regulation that requires them to? I get that they don't want to process fraudulent transactions, but I'd think the response to a higher percentage of fraud from some industry would be to charge them more. It doesn't make sense to me why they would be concerned about the content of games, as long as everything is legal and the parties concerned aren't subject to sanctions.

Some of these games seem completely abhorrent, and probably illegal in more restrictive jurisdictions, but not the United States. And I've not seen any suggestion they're funding terrorism or something. So I'm perplexed.

replies(28): >>44611411 #>>44611419 #>>44611451 #>>44611517 #>>44611528 #>>44611604 #>>44611625 #>>44611674 #>>44611713 #>>44611790 #>>44611866 #>>44612085 #>>44612637 #>>44612830 #>>44613322 #>>44613401 #>>44613483 #>>44613691 #>>44613744 #>>44614120 #>>44614860 #>>44615550 #>>44615769 #>>44616205 #>>44616269 #>>44616805 #>>44616821 #>>44616872 #
markdown ◴[] No.44611528[source]
It's not just games.

Payment processors ban many things that are completely legal, even foods and dietary supplements. It's ridiculous. They have too much power.

replies(2): >>44611644 #>>44613324 #
tptacek ◴[] No.44611644[source]
I have no trouble seeing why a payment processor would want to avoid doing business with dietary supplement companies.
replies(2): >>44611685 #>>44611929 #
maxbond ◴[] No.44611685[source]
I mean I wouldn't do business with them, I think the supplements industry is infrastructure for grifters, quacks, and pyramid schemes to fleece the desperate, but what's the problem for Visa? Is it a brand safety thing? My presumption would be that payment processors are amoral and have no problem processing payments for Consolidated Baby Kickers if it were legal to do so, is that a misconception?
replies(1): >>44611752 #
cperciva ◴[] No.44611752[source]
"Not as advertised" chargebacks. That industry is also full of subscription scams (e.g. someone thinks they're ordering a supplement for $5.99, but they're actually getting signed up for $39.99/month...).
replies(2): >>44611781 #>>44613333 #
1. tptacek ◴[] No.44611781[source]
Also the products don't work!
replies(1): >>44611843 #
2. cperciva ◴[] No.44611843[source]
I don't think the credit card networks would care about that if it weren't for the risk of chargebacks. Credit card networks have no problem with processing payments for churches!
replies(1): >>44611861 #
3. tptacek ◴[] No.44611861[source]
Right, no, I'm just saying: that drives a lot of chargebacks.