Why don't Visa and the third part processors do something?
 

About CP on Torrent site and the advertising.

If Torrent sites are infested with illegal content and non CP companies are advertising there why don't third party processors and VISA ban the advertisers?

Seems a very simple process and I sometimes get an emails from CCBILL telling me they banned an affiliate because of some of the terms he uses. So it's wrong for him to send me traffic, and I agree, but it's right for others to advertise on sites with CP or questionable links.

Just don't see the logic.

The cp links ( if they really were cp which I doubt probably just spyware infected video files) were removed with 2 hours of my reporting them to torrentspy. This CP crying by certain people is all about shock and awe thats it. If they were really concerned about the links they would of reported them and got them removed like I did. Was a tool in their arsenal to go after certain sponsors. Pathetic really..

Should it be up to you to report CP or spyware links or the site owners responsibility? Easy enough to ban words on a site and it's not an excuse if they can't afford to check/approve new entries. I suspect they can but know what traffic those links bring in.

Should Visa and 3rd party processors be supporting people who support theft and do so little to police their own sites?

You're right about others using it as a tool to go after other companies, but are the CC companies and 3rd party processors also not to be included. Seems to me the money comes first.

It wouldn't be a tool if it wasn't a real problem.

hard to ban words that are on images

There was a total of 3 links found under the search for cp. 1 of them was suspect, with no seeders. Other 2 had 18 year old girl in the title. Its bullshit, and pathetic. Plain and simple catch phrase shock tool. Pathetic.

Because what they will do is just get rid of Adult processing all together... you really want that?

So running a business that is too big to monitor is all right in your books?

"Sorry VISA we can't check for child porn and stolen content personally because we're too big and I need the money to buy a yacht more than employing people to watch over my business. But if others will spend their time for free then we might react to it."

Do you think that excuse will carry much weight in a court and if the FBI really were serious about 2257 ARE they looking in the wrong places?

Im going to sue google for not making sure all the sites they index are safe..... :uhoh

Paul, this is the reason that I have encouraged copyright holders to send DMCA notices to everyone involved - including AFF and it's hosting / connectivity providers. Putting AFF (and other sponsors) on legal notice would likely get at least a few minutes attention by their legal departments.

They need to step up to the plate and take action.

I always wondered why people make fun of Sticky. I never paid attention to his posts so I had no clue.


Now I know.

If we think it's OK to have 3 links supposed to be about CP and only 1 is questionable. Then it shows us in a bad light. If we run with companies that even appear to have or promote child porn they might think we condone it.

If we think having businesses too large to monitor is an excuse, which is bullshit. They might think they are better off with out us.

If we support companies who steal content and put VISA in harms way of getting sued. As Perfect 10 did. Then VISA could say best we cut adult loose.

If we separate ourselves from these companies VISA might not.

Most of the anti AFF threads are about losing a bit of traffic, think a bit further and it gets scary.

OK I'm the guy who thinks "Shit happens."

Paul, I had a long (and very animated discussion) on another board a couple of years back with someone who wanted to run a certain type of site that Visa would not process for. That webmaster was really frustrated and wanted to take Visa on and make a big stink.

The reality is this: Visa and Mastercard process for adult "just barely". In many cases, I think they are looking for a really good reason to go out the door. They know they can't, they know they would face massive lawsuits if they do, so instead they impose strict rules and somewhat odd limitations to try to keep the processing to pretty normal sites run by verifiable webmasters pushing out reasonably vanilla porn.

If you kick at Visa, their reaction isn't to fight back. They will coil up into a smaller ball, added more and more restrictions and more and more limitations and more and more unreasonable fees, attempting to weed out what is causing them pain. They don't want to be the porn police. They don't want to be the standard measurements. They are not interested.

What they appear to want is for porn to become a few dozen really large companies that they can deal with on a corporate level, dictating how the playing field will work, what is acceptable, and what is not. All these mom and pop porn operators are an annoyance, a pain to administer, and a pain to keep up with. Give them a reason to drop us, and they will find a way.

The issues of torrent sites (or any site) that contains CP links (or even CP like links) is an issue that the industry as a whole needs to address. Sadly, two of the largest players (AFF and AVN) appear to be leading the offenders rather than leading us to higher ground, and that sucks. It's up the rest of us to encourage them to do a better job.

Getting Visa involved would just bring pain and suffering to the wrong people.