Slashdot Mirror


WikiLeaks To Sue Visa/MasterCard

An anonymous reader writes "After six months of financial blockade by Visa and MasterCard, during which they claim to have lost over $15,000,000 in donations, WikiLeaks and Datacell are filing a complaint against the two financial giants, with plans to litigate should the block not be lifted. WikiLeaks stated, 'On June 9th the law firms Bender von Haller Dragested in Denmark and Reykjavik Law Firm in Iceland acting on behalf of DataCell and WikiLeaks told the companies that if the blockade is not removed they will be litigated in Denmark and a request for prosecution will be filed with the EU Commission.'"

10 of 347 comments (clear)

  1. As well they should by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Visa and Mastercard are payment processors, it's not their place to decide where one can and can't buy things and it's not their place to make moral decisions on behalf of their clients. Given how there are only 4 major options and that American Express and Discover have much smaller networks and are frequently not accepted, I can't see how Visa and Mastercard can possibly be allowed to continue these shenanigans.

    1. Re:As well they should by zero.kalvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well too bad, the law in the EU explicitly ask the companies to behave as the Grandparent poster explained.

    2. Re:As well they should by igreaterthanu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With an internet service provider, either the company should be liable for absolutely everything that passes through their network, and they should be free to allow and to block whatever they wish or they can claim "common carrier" status and waive liability, however they are required to allow everyone to use their network.

      In my opinion the same should apply to financial institutions. Visa and MasterCard should be allowed to block payments if they like, but if they do discriminate then they should be held liable when they do let illegal transactions get processed.

      --
      I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
    3. Re:As well they should by hansraj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure, if I opened a bar and posted a sign saying "Black people not allowed", everyone who is enraged should just stfu and go to a different bar instead. Right?

      OP did not suggest in any way that what VISA and Mastercard did was wrong because they did it to wikileaks. It makes a lot of sense to me to expect (maybe even require) companies not to pick moral sides. Let the people choose whether they want to donate to wikileaks, and let the court decide whether wikileaks should be allowed to receive donations.

    4. Re:As well they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Basically the GP is half-right... It isn't our place to decide who a company is allowed to deny services, however on the flip-side the company does not have a say in who they can do business with.

      E.g. Visa and MasterCard are perfectly free to say no to the customers EU law requires them to serve, and EU is perfectly free to keep those companies out of the EU market.

    5. Re:As well they should by paziek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, AFAIK Wikileaks didn't break any law in EU. Its Visa and MasterCard that could possibly do that - at least in EU that is. If they want to operate in EU, they need to comply. They don't want to? Well, I'm sure some else will take over.

    6. Re:As well they should by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      these are not 'just companies'. they ARE the financial infrastructure, in very many ways.

      the water company can't decide not to serve you. they can't ban you. this is essentially the same. once things are at this scale (bastardcard included) they HAVE to be impartial and offer services to all customers.

      if they want to 'look inside' of the souls that are their customers, they'll have to start rejecting a lot more customers, then.

      these guys are too large to be allowed to decide who can and who cannot exchange money in the world. yes, its almost to that level where a few control the world's flow of money. we all know it, so stop acting like its johnny's lemonaide stand on second street. this is the mainstream finance industry saying NO! and they simply should not have the right to say no to anyone.

      or, maybe its time they all get broken up.

      its also time we don't let things ever get to the point where things are 'too big to fail' or too big to be stopped or fought with. companies should NOT be allowed to just grow and grow. we tried that. it didn't work out. lets admit it and create a better model. (yeah, right, like those in control would entertain a revolution. in fact, THIS is what they are most afraid of. duh!)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    7. Re:As well they should by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "And it's not your place to decide who a company can and can't do business with, based on your own moral and political views."

      Credit card companies have a monopoly, it's like the utility company shutting off your electricity and water because they don't agree with your political stance or moral views.

      I'm glad they're suing, only reason Mastercard/Visa should stop accepting is if customers are complaining about fraud. If Mastercard/Visa stopped accepting Wikileaks what's next?

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    8. Re:As well they should by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ah yes, just like Cable and DSL, Democrat and Republican. Truly the free market is wondrous with it's choices.

  2. Re:Good fucking luck by TheSpoom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Realistically one of two things will happen. One: The trial will be over quickly as the CC companies find a way to short circuit the case, with an early dismissal or something similar. Chances: 60%. Two: The trial will take forever because the CC companies will drag it out, and Wikileaks will run out of money (since they control their primary source of donations) and settle. Chances: 39.9%.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs