- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
In case anyone is any doubt on the legality of retroactive changes to agreements where both sides do not consent my lawyer said the following on this issue. I post this as I’ve seen some uncertainty if it is legal or not, so to clear up this uncertainty this is what my lawyer said on the issue when I asked him for his opinion –
However, a change to the agreement that is retroactive is a whole other matter, and likely would not be valid, under Canadian law… absent some reasonable compensation for such changes, I would argue the changes are invalid on the grounds they lack consideration and are unconscionable.
Such retroactive changes as we have been discussing are thus not legal. Canadian law is based on English common law and he said this would be the same conclusion pretty much anywhere else in the world.
This means terms that introduce new requirements such as x new players a month must be sent to receive full commissions or that negatively cut the commissions we are due are simply not allowable changes.
And for the record I asked him for a straight up answer good or bad, not an answer that would support a position favourable to affiliates.
Tovey wrote:In case anyone is any doubt on the legality of retroactive changes to agreements where both sides do not consent my lawyer said the following on this issue. I post this as I’ve seen some uncertainty if it is legal or not, so to clear up this uncertainty this is what my lawyer said on the issue when I asked him for his opinion –However, a change to the agreement that is retroactive is a whole other matter, and likely would not be valid, under Canadian law… absent some reasonable compensation for such changes, I would argue the changes are invalid on the grounds they lack consideration and are unconscionable.
Such retroactive changes as we have been discussing are thus not legal. Canadian law is based on English common law and he said this would be the same conclusion pretty much anywhere else in the world.
This means terms that introduce new requirements such as x new players a month must be sent to receive full commissions or that negatively cut the commissions we are due are simply not allowable changes.
And for the record I asked him for a straight up answer good or bad, not an answer that would support a position favourable to affiliates.
Very interesting. The Meister has asked FA to come forward on their lawyers comments prior to the change. Should make for even more interesting reading. Wonder if the other programs that dd a similar thing will chip in too…haha..likely!
I don’t remember exactly where but someplace at fortune aff it does say they are subject to English common law also.
Is any one surprised that we are not getting any responses or reactions from the offending parties?
Spearmaster, the IGC is looking into this as we speak and asked for a bit of time to do it. Much like eCOGRA when dealing with player issues, they appreciate it if posting stops for a bit while they work with the parties.
I would like to grant them this. We will see the outcome and if necessary there will still be time for action.
I am not aware of the IGC looking into anything, nor am I aware that their code of conduct covers such things as affiliate issues.
I can check with them on that but frankly I have no intention of stopping any posting about this issue unless the IGC would like to give me a good reason to let the issue die down.
I do have faith that they will look into the issue, if they are doing so, and as I know that prominent members include certain software manufacturers I will hope for a positive outcome. But I have no intention of shutting up until the issue is resolved – that’s like asking the patient to shut up until the doctor finishes surgery.
eCOGRA also asks for posting to stop while issues are being solved.
It makes sense to do. I do know that this is going on and I am complying for now.
The IGC has no business in getting involved with affiliate business nor should they. I doubt that they are anyways. Just like the US congress should not get involved with baseball.
Give this a rest, if you don’t like a program then pull it, if it makes you money then promote it. This is all a business involving numbers, it is quite simple.
Brian
It would be that, just fine and just business, if they did not refuse to pay for already delivered players in the way the contract provided.
The IGC IS interested when casinos engage in ILLEGAL marketing practises, and breach of contract is that in all affected countries.
And now I will keep my peace until I hear about results.
Dominique wrote:eCOGRA also asks for posting to stop while issues are being solved.It makes sense to do. I do know that this is going on and I am complying for now.
eCOGRA gets involved in player issues where potentially the casino could suffer from negative publicity, and in some cases quite unfairly because of a miscommunication – and they usually answer in a day.
Here – there is no question as to miscommunication, or unfairness to the affiliate programs. Communication has taken place over an extended period of time, with plenty of time for clarification, and the programs have already indicated that they have no intention of resolving the issue.
In the meantime, affiliates continue to be damaged by their actions as well as those programs planning to follow them. With eCOGRA, there is no question of a casino going bad in the short amount of time it takes for them to resolve the issue.
if they did not refuse to pay for already delivered players in the way the contract provided.
she’s right.
but you are too Jeff; it is just business. But a deal is a deal. Until that is acknowledged and addressed; I don’t see how we can move forward. Let them change the deal for players sent forward this day; but not for players I sent under good faith that our original agreement would be honored.
They have in the terms the generic coverall note of “we can change the aff terms and if you don’t like it, then terminate the agreement”..
Business is business though and these firms are not playing the game with anything like evenhandedness. The demeanour is reprehensible. Why am I babbling on about demeanour etc?
Because I see talk of “the casino is not the same as the aff firm”, ## ~ so the casino keeps it’s good name?
Lol.
I trust the casinos will “evenhandedly with the correct demeanour” enter the chamber to insist on dialogue, or they are rogue. That costs money, in the end.
They(whoever they think they are) will talk, in the end.
joeyl wrote:They have in the terms the generic coverall note of “we can change the aff terms and if you don’t like it, then terminate the agreement”..When you read : “prices are subject to change at any time” , what does that mean to you?
Does it mean that the grocer will come to your house and look in your fridge and charge extra for all the items that went up since you bought them?
This is no rocket science. Whole careers are based on this. In commodities – you buy corn before it is grown and for that you get a locked in price. The real price will maybe go up or maybe go down lateron – but the earlier contract is locked in.
The conduct of Vegas Partners, Fortune Affiliates, Wager Junction and Partnerlogic is plain and simply illegal.
I am unhappy to say that there will be not further negotiations – Fortune is standing on it’s decision, knowing that it is highly unlikely that we would take them to court.
I am very tempted.
Meanwhile, I am going to optimize my earnings. That means a slow and deliberate switching out of programs.
Yeah, what happened to the IGC?
And why in the world didn’t you take these programs off your sites in the BEGININNG?
Fortune is in deep, deep shit. So is Vegas Partner Lounge. Intercasino and Wager Junction I will deal with later, but once the story of the Microgaming operators deception is told, there is going to be a lot of retribution.
In the meantime, for Microgaming operations that you can safely promote, try TridentShare, Brightshare, Money Mechanic, 32Red, and others which do not try to pull the wool over your heads, then beat you with a baseball bat, then hope that you will submit to their unethical and illegal tactics.
I also plan to contact a few “friends” in THEIR territory to see exactly what can be done.
