The evidence layer for digital commerce disputes.
Digital purchases leave behavioral trails. We work with issuer teams to understand how those signals should be evaluated in dispute decisions.
Join issuer research conversations
Digital commerce changed
Dispute evidence was designed around physical commerce: an order ships, a package arrives, someone signs. Digital purchases follow a different arc.
Physical commerce
- Tracking number
- Signature
- Delivery confirmation
Digital commerce
- Account access
- Product usage
- Consumption history
- Customer communications
Most dispute workflows, and most evidence standards, are still built around the first column.
What we're learning
This is research, not a product pitch. We're studying:
- Which behavioral signals indicate legitimate usage
- How dispute analysts actually evaluate digital evidence
- Where current evidence standards fail for digital goods
Why work with us
We also work with digital businesses on the merchant side, so let's address the obvious question directly.
Proofcrate does not make dispute decisions. Our goal is to help the ecosystem develop clearer, more consistent evidence standards for digital commerce. Better evidence should not mean more disputes. It should mean fewer ambiguous ones, and decisions that are easier to defend on both sides.
Research conversations involve no member or cardholder data, no PII, and no access to your systems. We're glad to sign an NDA or work within your compliance constraints.
Advisory conversations
We're currently in conversations with:
- Dispute operations leaders
- Fraud teams
- Card program managers
- Digital commerce experts
Proofcrate is led by Chris Liu, who spent years building payment systems at Amazon.
Share your perspective
A 30-minute research conversation about how your team evaluates digital-goods evidence today. No pitch, no demo, nothing to buy.
Email chris@proofcrate.io
Prefer writing to a call? A few written answers help just as much.