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.

    • IronKrill@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      1 day ago

      If they just wanted to follow the law, they could have left it at “don’t sell anything illegal” without all the extra “brand damage” nonsense.

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 day ago

      Up to the third comma, yes, but all the rest seems to go beyond that pretty arbitrarily.

      When they say anything that “may damage the goodwill of the corporation”, and qualify that with “in the sole discretion of the Corporation” that just means “anything we don’t want to be associated with, and we will be the judge of that”.

      That’s what makes it so vague, how is a Merchant or an Acquirer supposed to know what Mastercard might find damaging to the goodwill? They have to guess, or use trial and error*. Most will just err on the side of caution, which means customers get blocked from even more purchases, just to be safe.

      * Or talk to Mastercard, which Valve apparently tried, but they wouldn’t respond.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        21 hours ago

        When they say anything that “may damage the goodwill of the corporation”,

        Looks like MasterCard is going to have to ban MasterCard because of all the damage they’ve done to MasterCard’s goodwill.

    • Annoyed_🦀 @lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 day ago

      Their rules seem to just follow the law

      Whose law? The US? UK? Netherlands? Japan? Or Singapore?

      That’s why it’s vague.

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s much worse than that. How they word it is “if it may damage the public image of mastercard”. And they don’t review the content, they review the means used to prevent the damage to their brand.

        So valve doesn’t even need to have anything that actually damage mastercard brand, it just need to be that mastercard is not comfortable enough with the measures used to prevent it.

        • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Like buying anything would actually damage the brand of Mastercard. It’s such a nonsensical excuse that I’m surprised nobody laughed in their face.

          • SheeEttin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Yeah, right up until assholes start posting “MASTERCARD SELLS SMUT INCEST HENTAI GAMES” on TikTok. Then it’s a problem, and MasterCard considers that damaging to the brand.

            • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              17 hours ago

              There’s really nothing stopping anyone from posting that right now. That’s the quality level of most of the online content nowadays.

              • SheeEttin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                16 hours ago

                That’s my point. They are posting it, and MasterCard does consider it harmful to the brand, so now we’re here.

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      No, the rules don’t (that’s why it’s been fine for 7 years), and you used a derogatory term so cry harder about your downvotes.