Quote:
Originally Posted by Barefootsies
Agreed.
I, unlike a lot of people in this thread, am in the same boat as DWB. We both shoot content, and have to deal with 2257 as content producers.
That said, I simply prefer to pick my battles, and this is not one worth fighting, to me personally. However, DBW has his own motives, and business to run. I like DWB on a personal level, and I am not saying he is necessarily right or wrong. However, I simply do not see the point in all this.
When I sign up with a processor, I know they are little more than a middle man in the transaction process. We are in business together. I agree to their terms, just like they have to agree to the terms with their merchant bank, and their merchant bank with VISA.
I am essentially trusting them to not rip me, or my members, off. Trusting my members billing information with them. Trusting I will be paid for my memberships, and so forth. I am putting a lot of trust in them to remain IN business. If they had a question, like in this DWB case, I would just block out the non-essential (contact) info and show them whatever so I could get back to business. Not make a federal case about it, nor lose my rebills or effect my customers negatively over something like this.
But that's just me.
|
I agree with you BF... I sorta feel DWB is being a little strict here, but its his right to preotect his assets... hes not just thinking about rebills and these models, hes thinkign about his business as a whole and its future. Is it right or wrong whats hes doing, thats for neither of us or anyone else to decide, as im sure you agree.
but what i do feel... what epoch is asking isnt unreasonable... just as what DWB is asking isnt unreasonable. DWB has very good points... I mean he could sit ther and oblige epoch with instant ids... but hes not bending the law for anyone it seems. Seems he feels that anyone below the law can take the same route that the law takes to obtain such id if they so deem it necessary