Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PayPal Freezes Cryptome's Account

Posted by kdawson on from the gov-com-business-model dept.

grimwell sends in the news that after Cryptome's little run-in with Microsoft and NetSol, the activist site has now had its funds frozen by PayPal. Cryptome founder John Young notes, "Google lists thousands of instances of this asymmetrical high-handedness." "We have reviewed your PayPal Account, and due to the excessive risk involved, we would like to begin parting ways in a manner that is least disruptive to your business."

8 of 253 comments (clear)

  1. What's a Paypal? by symbolic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have, and will continue to, refuse to conduct business with online entities that do not support a non-Paypal option. I have never used Paypal, and I don't anticipate that this will change.

    1. Re:What's a Paypal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If this were a federally-regulated bank they would not be able to do this.

    2. Re:What's a Paypal? by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Be careful what you wish for; "regulation" isn't the answer here, it's a big part of the problem.

      Because nothing ever bad came from letting banks do whatever they want.

    3. Re:What's a Paypal? by wizardforce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Paypal may be able to refuse to do business with whomever they like but so do we. Every time Paypal pulls a stunt like this, we as private individuals have a right to call them on it.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    4. Re:What's a Paypal? by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Paypal may be able to refuse to do business with whomever they like but so do we. Every time Paypal pulls a stunt like this, we as private individuals have a right to call them on it.

      Oh yeah, this pisses me off too. Every time something like this happens, someone will say that they're a private business that has the right to do what it likes- but usually in the context of someone having criticised that company and expressed in a way that seemingly implies that any criticism of their actions runs counter to that principle.

      They're entitled to conduct their business how they wish (within reason), and they're entitled to ignore the negative opinions. But they're *not* entitled to expect protection from legitimate criticism, opinion and discussion expressed by others, nor from the effects of such criticism on them if they choose to ignore it.

      Same with "you think XXXX product sucks? No-one was putting a gun to your head and making you buy it!" type posts. No- the company is free to sell a products, and people are free to buy it- and others are equally free to express their opinion and advice as they see fit. They don't like that? Tough.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    5. Re:What's a Paypal? by lawpoop · · Score: 5, Informative

      And regulation never stopped them. We have plenty of regulations on banks, and take a look at their condition right now. Regulation didn't prevent the recent collapses.

      This is the exact opposite of the truth. In the late 1998, congress moved to weaken the Glass-Steagall act, which prevented banks from engaged in the risky securities trading that got them in trouble and caused this recent financial implosion. The Glass-Steagall act was passed after Great Depression when banks got themselves into exactly the same sorts of trouble they are in right now.

      In short, regulations kept exactly the situation we're in now from happening for some 70 years. Yes, regulations do work. Not just any arbitrary hammerings, but rules specifically designed to prevent bad, foolish things from happening. If the Glass-Steagall act had been in effect this whole time, we would have never had the tarp and never had to bail out the banks. The old rules didn't apply any longer, and the bankers went nuts dreaming up ever more clever schemes to make money out of nothing. The banking sector lacked regulation.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
  2. Paypal and fraud... by hadesan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    With heightened visibility comes more scrutiny. Paypal and their more shady customers probably don't want anymore light shown on their activities. Better for paypal to dump cryptome to protect their "more lucrative" albeit more less forthright customers...

    Here is a lovely site for some light reading... http://www.paypalsucks.com/

    Also an interesting story on a new scam in Boston on a scam using facebook, twitter, and Paypal http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/03/6000_fall_prey.html

  3. Re:When? by pla · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When will someone come out with a viable competitor for PayPal so that we will finally have a choice?

    A viable alternative already exists - Just use your bank as a CC payment processor.

    My father runs a small business (under half a million gross per year), and about two years ago discovered that his bank would handle everything for a quite reasonable fee - About the same as he previously paid just to take Visa, and, as a bonus, he can accept the dreaded American Express (as well as just about any major CC) that so many small businesses refuse to touch (meaning he can accept corporate and government business, which tend to use AmEx almost exclusively).

    If you expect mostly a lot of very small transactions (such as a typical web site "tip" jar), that model might not work so well. But if you sell anything best measured in "dollars" rather than "cents", it seems like a no-brainer.