FOSTA-SESTA is the source of this. A well intentioned bill, that, once again, has unintended consequences beyond it's original intention.

Mastercard/Visa/Banks don't want legal liability.

▲

chimeracoder 2 days ago | parent [-]

> FOSTA-SESTA is the source of this. A well intentioned bill, that, once again, has unintended consequences beyond it's original intention.

You're right that these are connected to FOSTA/SESTA, but you're missing the actual connection.

FOSTA/SESTA were not "well-intentioned". They were the product of lobbying from explicitly religious, anti-sex, anti-pornography groups. Those same groups are behind recent campaigns to require providing government ID to access pornography, to allow attorneys general to prosecute LGBTQ content, and to ban pornography from platforms like Steam and Itch.io.

FOSTA/SESTA have worked exactly as they were intended to! The intention was to make it harder to conduct sex work legally and safely, and they accomplished that goal!

These policies have little to do with FOSTA/SESTA themselves, in that the text of those laws has no bearing here. But those bills were the first big, national victory of these campaigns, and they used that momentum to raise absurd amounts of money to lobby for the other laws mentioned above, and to target financial infrastructure as an easy point of leverage to accomplish their goal of banning pornography across the Internet.

▲

turlockmike 2 days ago | parent [-]

Those bills are the reasons banks/credit card companies are pushing this since it holds them liable.

▲

chimeracoder 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Those bills are the reasons banks/credit card companies are pushing this since it holds them liable.

You are either misreading those bills or confusing them with other similar bills which did target banking infrastructure (and which thankfully did not pass).

FOSTA/SESTA did increase liability for platforms, but the applicability of those laws to this specific case is minimal to nonexistent.

▲

turlockmike 2 days ago | parent [-]

Banks didn't do this before 2018 as aggressively. Reputational stuff is always been there and chargebacks have always been there. This law is why they've been so aggressive over the last few years. There's nothing else that has changed

	▲	chimeracoder 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> This law is why they've been so aggressive over the last few years. There's nothing else that has changed There is so much that has changed! If you think FOSTA/SESTA are the only thing that have changed, you're clearly not up to date on this topic! > Banks didn't do this before 2018 as aggressively Because after FOSTA/SESTA passed in 2018, the groups that lobbied for it started targeting financial infrastructure as the front in their war. This is not some secret; they've been very open about it and their lobbying efforts have been extremely well-documented.