poker-6

Two weeks after Valve confirmed it had because of pressure from credit card companies—and one week after —Mastercard has denying responsibility for the takedowns, saying it [[link]] "allows all lawful purchases" to be processed through its systems.

"Mastercard has not evaluated any game or required restrictions of any activity on game creator sites and platforms, contrary to media reports and allegations," the company says.

"Our payment network follows standards based on the rule of law. Put simply, we allow all lawful purchases on our network. At the same time, we require merchants to have appropriate controls to ensure Mastercard cards cannot be used for unlawful purchases, including illegal adult [[link]] content."

It's an odd statement at first glance, because while the content removed by Steam and Itch.io may violate laws in some countries, it's fully legal in the US—objectionable and gross as hell in some cases, sure, but still within the boundaries of the law. Apart from that, both Valve and Itch.io explicitly stated that payment processors are the reason games were deindexed or removed from sale entirely.

Mastercard's 'out' here seems to be found in the structure of its operations. The company's website says it is "neither an issuer [a merchant bank] nor an acquirer [a bank, credit union, or other entity that provides debit cards or lines of credit to [[link]] consumers]," but rather that it "." In other words, Mastercard does not process payments, it facilitates the systems that do.

In the case of Itch.io, the platform specifies in its "" that its payment processors are Paypal and Stripe—and Stripe, which supports a including Visa and Mastercards, was the one "suspended the ability to pay with for 18+ content for the foreseeable future."

Similarly, both and , which were recently recommended by the IGDA as "alternatives to overly risk-averse financial partners," accept major credit cards as payment methods.

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."

relates to "illegal or brand-damaging transactions," and 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.

That includes, according to the rules, any product or services that "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."

Acquirers—the financial institutions that provide the cards and lines of credit—who fail to take action in response to complaints are subject to significant penalties, monetary and otherwise.

Regardless of the role Mastercard played in all of this, directly or indirectly, its "clarification" sure makes it seem like the pressure is being felt. Which from a gamer perspective, at least, is a good thing: As others have mentioned, a public pressure campaign certainly seemed to work for Collective Shout, the Australian anti-porn crusaders who —regardless of how the gears turn behind the curtain, there's no reason to think it can't work the other way too.