NATS to remove support for MyVirtualCard
 

Due to the recent findings of MyVirtualCard processing transactions for underage non-nude sites portraying children in a sexual manner Too Much Media LLC has decided to cease supporting MVC as a biller.

The sites MVC is processing for consist of girls ranging from 8 years old to 16 years old posing in sheer lingere, underwear, swimsuits, short skirts, etc. These poses are clearly in a sexual manner and these sites are targetted to nothing more than people who are sexually attracted to underage women. These sites are clearly morally wrong and most likely legally wrong.

Too Much Media LLC will not support or condone sites of this nature and/or anyone supporting them in any way.

At a time which MVC has discontinued processing for sites of this type Too Much Media may reconsider supporting their processing via NATS.

All of our clients are being notified of this policy change and will be given ample time to remove MVC from their cascades and all rebills will continue to be paid out to affiliates.

If any more information or assistance is needed please feel free to contact us at any time.

Good long-term move.

I can see where this is coming from
I wouldn't want to be associated with such sites as well!

Very nice move on Nats side, good work guys

LOL...

MVC turned me down for processing of an e-book ( mainstream, and not the " how to get rich" scam ) ....
Next time, I will spice it with underage kids ...

Makes two of us - and I'm gathering most of the industry feels the same!

Good move. I think MVC will not stay online for too long..

I hope MVC responds to this.

damn, i didnt know they did that...

Good move guys I hope MVC responds to this also

:1orglaugh

Smart move

Nice move, but TBH, I can't see anyone who uses NATS running an underage site.

Damn, I use MVC as a secondary processor on one of my sites, hope they dont go out of business soon... :(

why do you still support ccbill then? They sell access to plenty of "non nude" sites?

I can understand removing processing for future clients, but if you remove a processor from an existing client you might be in for a nasty suprise when their lawyers knock on your door... it's called Tortious Interference... you're not allowed to purposely interfere with the contracts of others and the only purpose your move has is to interfere with sites who use that processor.

Who died and made you king?

So? Theres a difference between 8 and 18 you cumbucket.

And i think theyre free to remove any processor they want from their software.

Now stfu shitstick.

I hope MVC responds to this..

I assume TMM contacted MVC about this before ceasing support, and maybe MVC didn't respond.

I don't believe CCBill is processing for any underage sites. We did not remove them for non-nude, we removed them for under age.

No one made us "King". We're simply choosing not to do business with nor associate with someone supporting underage sites.

Also, I prefer to get my legal advice from our lawyers not from some anonymous poster with 4 posts who probably registered on GFY today. Thanks tho.

I'll 2nd that :thumbsup

Nice move Nats :thumbsup

Of course we've spoken with MVC, both before and after this post.

I'll agree with Franck - non-nude 18 yr olds are quite different from non-nude 8 year olds. One caters to one group of folks, the other caters to another sick bunch of fucks.

NATS has the right to add/remove access to use the processors as they see fit. They aren't telling you that you have to cancel your contract, they are telling you that you will not be able to cascade it through their script any longer.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

john just curious, do you have access to every members credit card information through the "master" control panel that signs up under every nats system. meaning you can control everything.

What happens to clients who have already integrated with MVC? They won't be able to track any new joins from NATS?
WG

Yes, it's all true, there's a big red switch in the office. If we flip it, everyone gets charged $99.95 and we jump in the escape capsule and we're whisked off to our private island in the Bahamas.

Seriously, no. Processors such as CCBill, Paycom, etc. who are IPSPs do not allow any third party to take the credit card information so there is no way they can even have access to it let alone us. Any NATS client is permitted to totally lock us out of their system, but the vast majority permit us access. It's up to the client. People of course will now claim that there may be backdoors, secret logins, etc. but any technical person with decent abilities would still be able to detect this happening.

Both myself and Charlie are and were very well established before NATS came along. We have no reason to desire access to control or see everyone's data. We have no need for it. Jealous competition and jealous unsuccessful people love to start rumors tho. Comes with the territory. There is no "master control panel" no "master login" and no "consipracy" no matter how desperate the sig whores are for one.

We've spoken with them and all of that is resolved. They have all agreed with the decision.

You've spoken to every NATS client about this and they all unanimously agreed?
WG

Same here - good to know...

No, with those who were using MVC.

Bump

No longer using their service after reading this.

Curious if the sites were non-nude and non-sexual, if you'd have a problem with them? By law, if there's no sexual poses / unnatural (and non-sexual) poses then it's legal.

Matt

I'm not posting links to the sites but in my opinion they are clearly sexual.

Anyone who is going to tell me someone buying a membership for $25-45 per month for access to photos of girls in underwear is doing it for a non-sexual purpose is lying to and trying to convince themselves, not me.

If they were not sexual and we could see a clear purpose to the site then no, we would not have an issue with it. These sites however, in our opinion, are clearly sexual in nature.

Because our name was brought up, i will commment:

http://businesscenter.ccbill.com/htm...table_use.html

3. Violation of CCBill Policy

D. The posting, display, or advertising of any image using a model or models under the age of 18 years anywhere on the site whether the models are clothed or unclothed.

[QUOTE=corvette]Thank you. A policy every processor should have.

nats is not an asp, it is software that you purchase. If you bought microsoft word because it had features x, y, and z and Bill Gates decided one day that you didnt need a spell checker anymore and he just conveniently removed your ability to use that feature you'd be pretty fucking pissed I imagine.

I'm not questioning whether the content was good or not, i'm questioning nat's decision to retroactively remove a processor from a paysite.

How do you know which of your clients were using MVC? What about clients who own the software outright and lock you out?

I think when you start down the road of being the moral police for other people you're going to endanger your business.

Then our opinions differ. Simple as that.

Nice move

I just spoke with MVC who said they will be implementing a new policy to prevent this.

However, I'm quite shocked that they haven't made a reply here yet.

Hopefully MVC will clean their acts up, they actually have a great system, providing they are truly obidding by all the Visa regs.

good move... fuck the bastards who allow that shit 2 b sold & those who help them sell it :thumbsup:






...

Good move John, kudos to you and the team

:thumbsup

Great business decision guys

Your argument is ill thought out and is to be honest, offensive.

Welcome to GFY, you will fit right in :321GFY

Please see our Announcement

Good move. This industry needs to police itself from time to time. Sadly it's not illegal, but all that non-nude close to CP shit needs to go as well as any company that supports it.

Another good move. :thumbsup

that's a scary signature lol

i never liked the nn tgps, they only cater to one kind of people, you obviously can tell what kind

"We have no reason to desire access to control or see everyone's data."

ummm, better to be totally honest then - there WOULD be a reason for it :winkwink: - I agree that you don't need to do it though and I don't think you ever have.