Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

310

(post is archived)

[–] • 4 pts

All of these credit card processers enable transactions for crimes every single day. I see no reason to remove Visa from the lawsuit.

[–] • 1 pt

visa should police every one of 500 million credit card transactions each day, especially for content on websites that don't give any indication what is being purchased, because someone somewhere in all that data can be committing a crime

They shouldn't be held accountable if only the regulatory capture of such accountability would only benefit a payment processor with 50% market share and would likely be completely inneffective at preventing crime

[–] [deleted] • 3 pts

The court denied Visa’s motion to be dropped from a lawsuit against porn parent company MindGeek, ruling there was enough evidence to show the company “knowingly provid[ed] the tool used to complete the crime” of distributing child pornography.

On one hand, fuck visa. On the other hand, if all they did was process the transaction, this will set a terrible precedent. You think deplatforming by credit card processors is bad now? After this lawsuit they're not going to take any chances. Anything that looks shady they'll just say 'no' and drop you because they don't want to be dragged into a lawsuit.

The decision was made in connection with a suit filed by a woman who claims Pornhub dragged its heels after she warned it was hosting an explicit video taken of her when she was 13 — at one point requiring photographic evidence that she was the same child in the video.

She was 13 ffs! A 13 year old does not look like an 18 year old. You can't mistake the two. Not only is there a 13 year old in the video, but you have someone telling you that it's them in the video and asking you to take it down. What the actual fuck?

The clip entitled “13-Year Old Brunette Shows Off For the Camera"

Wait, they had a 13 year old in the video, the video title said she was 13, and the 13 year old was asking Pornhub to take down the video, AND THEY STILL WANTED HER ID BEFORE TAKING DOWN THE VIDEO?

[–] • 3 pts

Keep in mind, Visa took a position that processing is support for a cause. This is why they stood with (((banks))) to stop funding and financing gun shops and gun owners. Done correctly, this could prove very powerful in going after the Jews controlling our finance system. But I won't hold my breath.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Well, if a gun store owner/manufacturer can be sued then why not viza?

[–] • 0 pt

The fact that they allowed a video with that title at all says a lot.

[–] • 0 pt

this is the consequences of what happens when someone controls both sides of anything whether it be law, politics, science, ethics. when you control both sides all battles are fought on your terms so none of your bottom lines are crossed. look at the precident that would set yet none of the core problems of legality would be addressed with regards to such actions

[–] • 0 pt

The video title should have made it a no brainer instant remove situation.

However people who want their vids scrubbed would absolutely lie about their age to get them scrubbed because there is no amount of money the website is going to spend proving something isn't illegal vs just deleting it.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

(((They))) just haven't paid him enough yet.