Amid continued concerns about Steam and Itch’s changing of their approach to adult games earlier this year, the UK government have stated they’ve got “no plans to intervene” in the decisions of payment processors who opt to withdraw support over certain content.
If you’re out of the loop, Itch and Valve changed their rules regarding adult content in games a few months ago. That prompted a number of delistings and takedowns, as well as concerns about censorship. The storefronts pointed to pressure from credit card companies who process their purchases, with Australian protest group Collective Shout taking credit for nudging those payment processors into action.
In response, counter-campaigners have been making various efforts to push for a reverse in course, by mass calling companies like Visa and Mastercard, as well as petitioning governments to intervene. Enter a petition to the UK government urging politicians to “ban payment processors stopping services based on objections to legal content”, which has just gotten a response.
“Decisions regarding which businesses payment processors contract with are a commercial matter, taking into account the relevant requirements on the firm,” reads the UK treasury statement in question. “These decisions will be influenced by a variety of factors, and the Government has no plans to intervene in those commercial decisions.”
UK response to the payment processor petition:
[image or embed]
— Ana Valens | 🔞 | Announcements Only (@acvalens.net) 7 October 2025 at 02:39
It’s not a hugely surprising outcome, especially given this petition follows another one which currently has over 540,000 signatures and attempts to convince the government to repeal the Online Safety Act, which came into force in the UK earlier this year and requires adult media sites to use age verification. That petition also received a firm no.
This latest appeal, which has so far amassed 12,355 signees, cited “reports that payment processing companies have recently placed pressure on companies that rely on their services, pressuring them to remove legitimate content” and called for payment processors to be made to “remunerate platforms and individuals for lost income until service is restored”.
From my perspective, I’d say the wording opted for might have made the petition easier to dismiss, since it doesn’t specify the legal adult games that are allegedly being targeted. To be clear, that’s solely based on the view that it’d potentially be easier for politicians to wave away the petition or plead ignorance of its context if the question’s more vague, assuming they’re also likely predisposed not to want to be seen to mess with business/the processors unless presented with an undeniable reason for doing so. That said, it’s impossible to tell from the page whether those who submitted the petition have or were given the chance to offer specific examples that could fill in any gaps.
If you want a much more thorough rundown of both the role payment processors play in defining or influencing definitions of what’s permissible in terms of adult content, it’s well worth checking out Edwin’s full report on the subject. In that report, former Stripe software engineer and acadmic Dr David L. Stearns said that he does believe it’s possible the pushback from game developers could result in governments opting to amend or clarify laws or regulations, but this would likely require “significant leverage” in the form of pressure from voters or lobbyists.
Another potential solution is game storefronts seeking out alternative payment processors for adult content, something Itch.io have previously indicated they’re looking into, but that one isn’t a guaranteed win, either.
