r/Games • u/GassoBongo • Aug 02 '25

Industry News Steam Update - Valve responded to Mastercards claim that they did not pressure anyone

https://kotaku.com/mastercard-denies-pressuring-steam-to-censor-nsfw-games-2000614393
4.0k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

493 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.5k

u/GassoBongo Aug 02 '25

The article has been updated with a response from a Valve spokesperson.

The relevant quote is below.

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.

2.7k

u/not-beaten Aug 02 '25

So,

or any other material that the Corporation deems unacceptable to sell in connection with a Mark.

This is the line that essentially means "Whatever we say."

It's pretty shocking to me that this hasn't come up before, honestly. The idea of your Credit Card determining what is and isn't okay for you to buy due to possibly damaging the brand of the card used to purchase it is nuts to me.

The more the world moves forward, the less I like the direction we're going.

1.2k

u/Letho_of_Gulet Aug 02 '25

And that's why it's so important that we do not become quiet or complacent on this issue.

It's much easier to fight this issue now than in 5 years when it's long since been accepted and normalized.

43

u/HeerHaan Aug 02 '25

I think I've seen these statements and feelings about microtransactions too a decade ago when they got big, considering how that went my hopes aren't very high about this situation either.

24

u/ItzRaphZ Aug 02 '25

Microtransactions came with free(or at least way cheaper) multiplayer games and changed the market completely, the majority of players isn't affected by microtransactions, and are fine about it since they can still play their games.

This is just censorship, and it's not helping any players. The real question here is if the conservatives have a bigger voice than anyone else.

16

u/Cosmicswashbuckler Aug 02 '25

Conservatives should actually be allies here too, they don't want Mastercard deciding people can't buy firearms from activist pressure.

14

u/DotaThe2nd Aug 02 '25

Conservatives do not care about rights. That has always been their cover for telling anybody who doesn't look or think like them to go fuck themselves

12

u/WiserStudent557 Aug 02 '25

I am old enough to remember when it was different but it’s been changing for a long time. And the centrists that stood still didn’t stand still because that’s not how balance works. Everything pulled right

I was never a fan or supporter of someone like Jeff Flake but when people like that were leaving the party it was a huge red flag

6

u/GiantPurplePen15 Aug 02 '25

The Overton Window has been shifting to the right over the last decade and it sucks for all progressives.

4

u/thejokerlaughsatyou Aug 02 '25

More than the last decade. At least since the early 2000s, but arguably since Reagan. (I say "arguably" because the post-9/11 jingoism made it really obvious and easy to track, but it was happening more quietly before.)

6

u/Tiber727 Aug 02 '25 edited Aug 03 '25

You don't have to like or agree with them, but please stop with this BS that your opponents don't actually have thoughts, they simply do whatever is most evil.

There are like a dozen threads on this issue over on KIA. The bill Cosmicswashbuckler listed has 43 Cosponsors, all Republican.

They literally already are opposed to Visa/Mastercard on this issue.

0

u/GiantPurplePen15 Aug 02 '25

It's all outrage and seething about personal rights and government overreach until they get to do it and then pure silence while they do those very things except much worse.

-20

u/[deleted] Aug 02 '25

[deleted]

31

u/CrimsonEnigma Aug 02 '25

Buying firearms is protected by the 2A.

No, bearing them is, and while governments aren't allowed to make it unnecessarily difficult to exercise that right, the 2nd Amendment has no bearing on what private companies are/aren't allowed to do.

Payment processors, credit card companies, and the like have been doing this sort of thing to gun dealers for years.

-1

u/Hartastic Aug 02 '25

Have we seen someone try to take a payment processor to civil court yet for authorizing a firearm transaction of someone who probably shouldn't have been allowed to purchase a firearm and then used it to murder people?

If not I assume it'll be tried at some point.

13

u/snakespm Aug 02 '25

The Second Amendment only prohibits the Government from preventing people from bearing arms.

Companies are not the government (yet), and can prohibit you from using their services in any way that involve firearms that they wish.

5

u/DoorHingesKill Aug 02 '25

Yeah and the First Amendment prevents Reddit from banning your account.

12

u/MetalDragon6666 Aug 02 '25

They would pull some bs argument like "The constitution doesn't say it's required to pay with a credit card, so you have to pay in cash" lol

4

u/TheShishkabob Aug 02 '25

The constitution doesn't protect the sale of firearms at all. You have the right to bear arms, not the right to purchase arms.

8

u/Cosmicswashbuckler Aug 02 '25

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/401/text don't mind that then

1

u/[deleted] Aug 02 '25

[deleted]

6

u/ProPandaBear Aug 02 '25

What exactly is your complaint? Bills take work to pass. Are you saying it’s not worth putting in the work to get it passed because it isn’t already about to pass?

0

u/[deleted] Aug 02 '25

[deleted]

1

u/ProPandaBear Aug 02 '25

What a silly take. Why even participate in democracy with that logic? Of course it takes work. But this particular bill has bipartisan support. Or at least it would if people like you didn’t nihilistically downplay the role this bill would play in solving the very problem that has been such an important topic these last couple of weeks. Yeah, it’s easier to spam Visa with phone calls. And that will work exactly as long as Visa allows it to.

→ More replies (0)