• 0 Posts
  • 4 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle
  • You will find such language pretty much everywhere. And there are reasons for it. A good example are certain drugs that are technically not illegal. Because they have not been officially classified yet.

    That used to be a thing here in Sweden some time ago, where they’d just change some little compound and could technically, legally sell it online until it was deemed otherwise. Because it’s now technically a new formula. Once it was classified, they just repeated the proceas.

    MasterCard might not want to be seen as an enabler in the drug trade. So while it’s technically legal. They don’t want anything to do with it. And would like the option to take action.

    And according to the articles. It’s not MasterCard pointing to that regulation, but the processors. As MasterCard notes. They’re not a bank, they’re not processing your payment. They just provide the technology to do so.

    Furthermore. I’m quite amazed that people seem to think Valve is this really good company that we can all trust and take their word on. Valve says one thing. MasterCard says another. I wouldn’t take either one of them on just their word. Better to take a step back, and see how it develops so you don’t make yourself a useful idiot.



  • Just because you don’t understand their response, doesn’t mean it’s a nothing statement.

    “Unlawful”, based on the region that you and the vendor operate in. And yes, that does vary based on which region you and they are in. And yes, it can get very complicated. Welcome to the world of economics.

    In short. Vendors can be considered unlawful in your region, even if they don’t offer the specific illegal service or product in your region, but do in others.

    What MasterCard is saying here is. “If we’re not legally required to take any action. We won’t”