I'd say 8 is "worse" than 13 :2 cents:

I smell D RAMAAAAA

Does it smell like Chicken ? :Oh crap

The real question is, using them can be dangerous to your business.

Lets say ya got alot of money wrapped up in them and had no idea.

The authorities move in on the prcessr.
Poof there goes yur money for a long time.
Poof the cops may come to your door also.

Please point out where I said it is OK ?

Please point out how I dont know shit about US laws ?

Agreed, on a personal level I totally understand your motivation, yet you cannot point out the law that makes it illegal.

Got my point?

Also, where did anyone advertise exactly those questionable sites?

Thanx

Glad to see someone understands. thanks really appreciate this post. We want zero to do with guys like that. We have legal sites 2257 all over process with a legal processor who processes nothing BUT legal 18+ sites.

Thats how it is and thats how its gonna stay. And for everyone else using MVC, think bout this.

Found this on www.adultweblaw.com



United States v Knox:

In Knox, a man who had previously been convicted of receiving child pornography through the mail ordered video tapes (by mail) of girls between the ages of ten and seventeen who, in the Court's words, "were dancing or gyrating in a fashion not natural for their age." The girls wore bikini bathing suits, leotards, or underwear - none of the girls in the videos was nude. The videos were set to music, and it appeared that someone off-camera was directing the girls. The photographer videotaped the girls dancing, and zoomed in on each girl's pubic area for an extended period of time. Knox was prosecuted under United States Child Pornography laws.

Legal counsel for Knox argued that "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" meant that the girls had to be nude - wearing clothing meant that that genitals and pubic area were clearly not exhibited. The Court disagreed and held that there was no nudity requirement in the statute: "the statutory term "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area," as used in 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(E), does not contain any requirement that the child subject's genitals or pubic area be fully or partially exposed or discernible through his or her opaque clothing."



Although I have not checked out the sites in question I thought this might apply :2 cents:

Oh I can, one guy went to jail for this clothed underaged stuff in the US. With some searching I could popup his data for sure.

...thanks thats the guy I was mentioning. He's in jail now.

It smells like really young chickens :(:(:(

Ya can bet INTERPOL is on these guys anyways.
I read there are like some 20 different investigations going on in the US alone.
Some of those are International.

Silence does NOT mean safe.
I would bet money, Authorities are investigating them right now.

Good. Bet one CEO can't sleep.

icqd mvc support no reply obviously

damn...:(

myVirtualCard (339460672) Wrote:
We are in a meeting about this right now. Please post that I did respond to you

Yupp, got the same answer

hmm I did too 3 months ago...

This is not realy about if this is legal or not, its about GFY having them in a top banner spot. If anyone at adult.com did some investigation before they just took the money and put up the banner this thread wasn't needed at all :2 cents:

thinkx, you do realize that this is nothing new? even processors like ccBill processed for these sorts of sites up until a couple years ago? like it or not, they are supposedly legal w/in the US, whether you find them repugnant or not (i do as well)... but, *don't* link to this kind of shit on GFY, for any reason... excuses or justification be damned..

I did'nt see him link at all.

no ccbill never processed for 8yo kids

heh, perhaps you haven't been around long enough to remember, but ccBill in their past did indeed process for these same sort of sites, along w/ many other processors... this realm was not segregated to the smallish euro/russian/offshore processors by any means. aside from the fact that as of now, the 'underage modeling' scene is not actual "KP" by the letter of US law, whether we like it or not... just ask ASACP. just make sure you know your facts before you start throwing stones..

believe me we're in this biz for a LONG time so I do know. Plus the major underaged processor was dutch remember. And letter of the US law or not, ppl got convicted read the thread.

But ive asked Corvett lets see what he has to say.

We as a company believe strongly in security, stability, and ensuring the legality of our business. To this end, we feel the need to responsd to this thread in order to put to rest concerns that have been brought up in this thread.

First and foremost, myVirtualCard does indeed process for non-nude teen sites. Each site we process for has been approved by our acquiring banks, and we have gone through the content to ensure it doesn?t just comply, but also meets our minimum standards.

Next, we are aware that the non-nude teen sites do pose a potential problem to some merchants in the adult industry. For that reason, we have stopped accepting new sites in this market, and are slowly working to decrease the current sites in this industry that we process for. We have indeed been eliminating sites, and will continue to do so, but in a professional manner. It would be unprofessional of us to simply cut off processing for any site that is legal and still abides by our terms and conditions. I am sure many merchants in the industry can understand that simply being cut off without warning is among the worst thing that can happen, especially when your site was approved in the first place. For that reason, a cancellation should not and will not occur overnight. We have been saying this for quite a while, and we have been making good on our word.

Thirdly, myVirtualCard takes the topic of child pornography very seriously, like all processors. Like all processors in the industry, we cannot monitor every single site that uses us for billing. It?s very easy for merchants to hide the unapproved site behind a real front, and it would be difficult for us to discover this, especially considering the sheer number of sites we have to watch. This is why we do react to reports of illegal content. We work closely with our acquiring bank for Visa and MasterCard to ensure that the sites meet their requirements, and are acceptable.

We here at myVirtualCard work hard to bring the best service to our customers, and work hard to maintain a legitimate and honest company. While some people may feel we may not act as quickly as they would like, we treat all customers of myVirtualCard equally as long as they abide by our terms.

We appreciate the responses and opinions in this thread, and ask that anyone that has any further questions, concerns, or would simply like to discuss this further to please contact us. We are an open company and want to make sure that your questions are answered.

Sincereley,

The myVirtualCard Team

aaaaaaaah ok so you guys are eliminating sites? ok so on what basis?

0-9 : not ok
10-13 : ask ceo
14-17 : ok

that basis?

Uncalled for. Totally

I start to believe you really just want to stir shit up cause you seem to have issues with MVC.

good to know what side youre on and fyi we have no issues whatsoever with mvc

Agreed, chill dude.

either that or just garden variety post whoring. i love to see the indignant ethical posts here when they crop up though..

Why, then, don't your terms and conditions forbid sites that present underage kids as jack-off material?
And why did you decide to approve those sites in the first place?

It's called double-standard, happens a lot in this industry.

Imagine processors would approve and decline merchants by personal taste and standards.... :helpme

Laws are there for a reason, usually to go by them. :2 cents:

Thats basicly all to be left said to this drama thread.

exactly, thats why this guy (see the adultlaw link in this thread) got convicted.

Hope someone doesnt knock at your door and ask if your 8yo daughter wants a site. See who's drama it is then.

You're SO on the wrong side.

Non-nude teen sites? They claim she's 10 on the site, but she looks more like an 8yo.

So your official response on this site is that you and your company feel it's okay and you won't be removing it because it wouldn't be "fair" to the people who put it up? I want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly.

This thread was NOT started due to a problem processing TEEN NN Sites
it was started due to a problem processing PREteen sites. The Comunity of Legit NN webmasters (18+year old models) My self included would never deal with
underage preditors,or people who work with them in any capacity.

Well im off for today, half a day later and a lot wiser. MVC is on our never do business with list.

Its also good to know whos on what side. Its good to see ppl like CityStyleGirls dont just sell great but also have a sense for ethics.

Its a shame some ppl just are like 'hey its the law so Im not questioning anything', I can understand there will always be ppl who follow and ppl who will question first.

Im glad Im putting question marks on a company processing for adults who live of the income generated by 8yo kids. And I think everyone should.

Gnite.

wow nice research ... I had no idea ............. they still had banners on GFY
I never notice them anymore

Still - you would think they might comsider who they have advertising here, since this is mostly adult webmasters (used to be - now surfers roam, but still...)

Thank you thinkx for pointing this out, I visited that site you posted, and I think it's disgusting. Any of their members should dropped off in a desert somewhere. It may not be child porn, but pedos join sites like that to jack off.

And for that reason, we are pulling any banners for their processor, and I'm sure MVC will not allow these types of sites in the near future, and we will be glad to support them after that decision.

Adult.com will not support anyone who supports those types of activities.

Im not blowing smoke up your ass, That was a real stand up move.

damn lensman, that was some good shit right there :)

Great move as a standup company no-one should be willing to be involved with this type of shit :thumbsup

Morning lensman and thank you so much, appreciate this move, its good to see we think alike about ethics.

thanks again :thumbsup

Great move Lensman and a thank you to thinkx for helping fight this type of shit. I have 2 small kids and stuff like this pisses me off more than I could ever express. Keep up the great work.

Nice to see someone from GFY not only reply but also enforce policy, Thanks Lens!

youre welcome, Im glad this is solved this way :thumbsup

good and smart move

holy shit the banners were pulled.

I loathe the double standards on here though, CCbill processed underage sites too and they never got any heat for it now did they?

also...
8 is not worse than 13... it's both repulsive! Underage is underage, doesn't matter if it's 8 or 13.

100 double standards