In the escalating controversy over the removal and delisting of NSFW (Not Safe for Work) games on PC platforms Steam and Itch.io, credit card giant Mastercard has issued a statement denying its involvement. However, Steam operator Valve has countered, stating it was pressured by payment processors who specifically cited Mastercard’s terms of service, creating a head-on conflict between their respective claims.
目次
Mastercard Officially Denies Involvement, Stating It “Has Not Requested Any Restrictions”
Following a series of actions by Valve and Itch.io to restrict NSFW games, with both platforms citing “pressure from credit card companies,” Mastercard released an official statement to clarify its position.
“Contrary to media reports and allegations, Mastercard has not evaluated any game or required restrictions of any activity on game creator sites and platforms,” the company stated. It continued, “Our payment network follows standards based on the rule of law. Put simply, we allow all lawful purchases on our network.” This declaration denies direct involvement in the recent turmoil and further complicates the question of who is driving the “pressure” that platforms like Valve have pointed to.
Valve Counters, Claims Mastercard’s Policies Were “Specifically Cited”
In response to Mastercard’s statement, Valve offered a different perspective in a comment to PC Gamer.
According to a Valve representative, “Mastercard did not communicate with Valve directly, despite our request to do so.” The interactions were reportedly handled through payment processors. In these communications, the processors rejected Valve’s position and “specifically cited Mastercard’s Rule 5.12.7 and risk to the Mastercard brand.”
Valve’s argument is that while there may have been no direct order from Mastercard, the company’s own rules were used as leverage by payment processors, functioning as an indirect form of pressure on the platform.
The Complex Structure of Payment Systems: The Root of the Discrepancy
The conflicting statements from the two companies are rooted in the complex architecture of the modern payment system. Mastercard defines itself not as a card issuer or a merchant acquirer, but as a company that provides “the technology and network that power transactions.” Since it does not directly process individual transactions, its claim of not “requesting restrictions” is, from its perspective, accurate.
However, the rule in question, Mastercard’s “Rule 5.12.7,” prohibits transactions that are “illegal, or may, in Mastercard’s sole discretion, damage the goodwill of the company or reflect negatively on the mark.” This includes content deemed “patently offensive and lacks serious artistic value,” a definition with a potentially broad and subjective interpretation.
Financial institutions (acquirers) that issue cards and manage merchant accounts face significant financial penalties for violating Mastercard’s rules. To mitigate this risk, acquirers and payment processors (like Stripe) often preemptively adopt stricter content policies. This “indirect pressure” is what ultimately reaches platforms like Valve, forming the core of the current issue.
Freedom of Expression and the Future of Platforms
The recent wave of delistings is believed to have been triggered in part by lobbying efforts from the Australian anti-pornography group “Collective Shout,” which targeted credit card companies.
This situation has highlighted how payment networks, functioning as essential public infrastructure, can effectively hold the power of life and death over digital content. The fact that legally distributed content can be forced out of the market based on a vague “reputational risk” standard is a major cause for concern for game creators, platforms, and consumers alike. The debate surrounding freedom of expression and the discretionary power of payment platforms is expected to intensify in the coming months.