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.
What?
Did you not read literally the first line?
Yes.
Plausible deniability.
“Oh so sorry that wasn’t us, one of our partners just overzealously applied our policies”
You seem to have forgotten what we were discussing, which was that Mastercard didn’t say anything.
You really buy that?
Valve asked mastercard directly.
A lack of a response is also a response, in this case essentially an endorsement of whatever their partner was telling Valve.
Even moreso when that partner is citing mastercard terms.
May not have been mastercards mouth, but it was LITERALLY their words.
If they had something to add, they had their chance. They’re only officially saying anything now that they have to.
I see we’re going with the insanity approach.
Valve asked mastercard for direct communication.
“Hey, your partner is citing your terms and pushing us to pull certain titles, you ok with this?”
Not responding to that is a response.
deleted by creator