Slashdot Mirror


Pirate Party MEP Helps Draft New Credit Card Company Controls

Dupple writes with this excerpt: "It has become an increasingly large problem that Visa, MasterCard, and Paypal control the valve to any money flow on the planet. Today, the European Parliament established this as a clear problem, and initiated regulation of the companies, limiting and strictly regulating their right to refuse service. The Pirate Party was the initiator of this regulation, following the damaging cutoff of donations to WikiLeaks, after said organization had performed journalism that was embarrassing to certain governments."

14 of 129 comments (clear)

  1. catch-22 by doug141 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What will finance companies do when one government's laws make it illegal to do business with some entities, while another government's laws mandate it?

    1. Re:catch-22 by fredprado · · Score: 4, Informative

      What they always do. Deny service to those people with credit cards from the countries that want to forbid and allow service to those people with credit cards from the countries that mandate it.

  2. True dat by Frankie70 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Journalists really are no longer in the business of letting their readers know what their government doesn't want them to know.

  3. Money by Frankie70 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Donate money to one or both the governments and get the laws fixed. Next Question.

    1. Re:Money by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, we already know what happens in this situation. US law takes precedence. Example: Danish company wires $26k to a German bank and the payment is seized by the USA because it was a payment for Cuban cigars.

      The EU has a terrible track record when it comes to stuff like this. SWIFT was the only major payment network that was a European company and the US Treasury completely compromised it by seizing their US datacenter. So they built another datacenter in Europe so they could have multi-homed operations without exposure to the USA and whilst construction was being done, the US put huge pressure on the bureaucrats who then rolled over and said, sure, you can have all the data you want from SWIFT. So if the EU parliament really wants payment networks to stop doing things because the US wouldn't like it, the first step is to cut off the US Treasuries unilateral access to SWIFT data. But they won't.

  4. Re:Regulation is problematic by Laglorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe there should be a regulation then "don't put all those cables on the ground" ;)

    In my experience analogies are like fauly watches, they are seldom correct and most of the times gives a sense of undestandning something but in reality just complicates things.

  5. Cables are good or bad by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you throw cables on the floor for any reason, or string them at random heights or intervals to please one particular person, yes - they can bring all progress to a halt.

    Properly planned and distributed, however, they can take a seemingly impossible task - such as spanning a large body of water, capturing a large number of fish, jumping out of an airplane from several thousand feet up and landing safely, or climbing a very tall structure - and make it a straightforward task.

    The only difference between gridlock and utility is the thought and care with which the regulations are laid.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  6. Re:Regulation is problematic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    While I like regulation in many cases, like nuclear power plants, in my experience new regulations are like cables.

    When you put all the cables on the floor, they're more likely to snag your legs, or get entangled and knotted with each other.

    This is why sometimes the solution is fewer regulations, and more direct solutions. [...]

    Listen. To me. Your. Guy. Lost. The. Election. Already.

  7. Re:Journalism.....!? by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Informative

    The irony is that it was a "true journalist" that accidentally leaked the encryption key to the WikiLeaks archive with the embassy cables. WikiLeaks up to that point seemed to know their limitations and was working with established journalists to release the cables in a controlled fashion.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  8. Re:Not "American fundamentalist moralism" by mrbester · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's also the issue that you can donate to the KKK using Visa but can't donate to Wikileaks because Visa have arbitrarily deemed them "guilty" of some crime, most likely at the behest of US Govt.

    --
    "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  9. Re:Not "American fundamentalist moralism" by Christian+Engstrom · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, it was the payment service providers Visa, MasterCard and PayPal who took the decisions to block, not the Swedish banks.

    --
    Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
  10. Re:Regulation is problematic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh Americans... will you ever realize, that regulation is when you get to say "No! Stop it! We won't have it like this! Now it's my rules!"

    Which is your only damn defense against those 20-page terms & conditions contracts.

    Why the hell you would complain about such regulation, that does you good, and instead choose to defend the companies, that get to do way too much already, so they can do even more evil shit, is a riddle to us non-Americans.

    It's like a rape victim complaining that his savior should not tell his rapist what to do so much.

    Then again, in North Korea, they really believe that if you touch an American flag, your hands will rot off. As if that would really actually happen...

    So I guess people can be brainwashed into almost any delusion... even that their rapist would be the one that needs "more freedom"... and protecting your own rights would be "harming the free market".

  11. Re:BIIIIIITTTTCOOOOIIINNNSSS!!! by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can get money to anyone in the world in approx 10 minutes

    Sure, if you have an extraordinarily loose definition of "money."

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  12. Re:Regulation is problematic by TheRealGrogan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are conditioned to believe this shit at early ages... "If you want to be rich some day, you have to think this way and support Free Market Capitalism. Anything else is just bad, and you don't need to know any more about it. Let's just call it all Socialism. It kind of rhymes with Satan, well, it starts with the same letter, at least."

    This is why you have stupid people, who haven't a pot to piss in, that lobby against things that are in their own interests, in favour of the corporate greed.

    Ordinary workers, living from paycheck to paycheck, getting in debt, saying that at least under (Insert Republican candidate they've been conditioned to support) they get to "keep what they have". No sir, they don't want anything like subsidized health care, they'd rather go into mortal debt for an emergency appendectomy. At least they are living the American Dream and doing it on their own, because government handouts are Socialism, which is the same as Communism (See, the old U.S.S.R. had the word "Socialist" in the title)

    Now these big companies, whose "freedom" they worship, are wanting to claw back their meager wages and benefits while execs get bonuses. Damn those unions for interfering with the God Given Rights of the corporations.

    Of course not all Americans are this obtuse, it's just that they are also taught to be very vocal when others don't agree with their beliefs, or criticize their country.