[tflinton]

Before anyone goes with pitchforks at Mastercard or Visa it's worth remembering that just because something isn't criminal it can still be quite a civil issue.

Visa and Mastercard take on quite a bit of risk by allowing payment transactions to companies who wade into murky businesses that while not illegal may have a lot of risk.

The amount of lawsuits that these processors get co-named in for providing payment rails is probably enormous and without laws protecting them I don't see how they don't have a choice in actively censoring.

[johnnyanmac]

So we're supposed to capitulate to censors because it's hard to do business? If it's too hard, don't do it. I think Visa/Mastercard get more than enough business to justify the inevitbale costs/abuse of the system.

>The amount of lawsuits that these processors get co-named in for providing payment rails is probably enormous

yes, that's called being a billion dollar business. Literally any billion dollar business is facing dozens of lawsuits on the daily. They have dedicated lawyers on hand for this ineviability.

[tflinton]

It’s still a very large considerably risk. They don’t have the equivalent of a net neutrality law to shield them. Money transferred on their network is their liability.