I’ve heard that argument used before from big US based affiliates …
It was unconvincing then – and it’s unconvincing now too.
:tongue:
You’re still taking money for promoting casino games, and are paid commission when you successfully do that. The fact that your commission is calculated differently (and usually at a much lessor value) would not give you any protection (IMO) if the US government did decide to make you a test case.
There is no legal difference between a CPA based incentive payment and a REV SHARE incentive payment from a real money casino. Yes one is usually a smaller share – but that’s it. You can try to split hairs on this – but in the loose terms of the aiding and abetting online gambling description – both would seem to be coverd.
:sarcasm:
The only REAL indemnity you could get was if you negotiated fixed monthly advertising fees (that had no incentive or success based reward), AND also only advertised the .NET platforms that do not accept cash or real players.