For what it’s worth, on GPWA, Michael Corfman (President of Casino City)
states the following:
“No, an affiliate could not be considered aiding and abetting illegal gambling in the US if the affiliate promotes gaming at sites that do not accept players domociled in the US. In the case of Casino City, we only accept payment on a CPA basis, which further diminishes the risk that we could be found to be aiding and abetting. Such a charge requires that you be actively engaged in the business in a way that our attorneys advise us is not the case for Casino City. In fact, the U.S. Department of Justice moved to have our case dismissed with one of the significant reasons cited being that we did not meet the criteria for being charged with aiding and abetting.”
I queried him as to why he thinks CPA earnings diminish risk, and will post here, if/when I get his reply.