zlacker

I think the issue he's raising is how you define advertising though. Is texting your friend a link advertising? What about posting a link on a forum? On Wikipedia? On your portfolio? On your footer? On your nav bar?

I think everyone agrees the name should not be damnatio memoriae nor should you be able to link to a click-wrapper, but people will always push the gray area in between as far as they can for that kind of money.

>>mminer+(OP)
I think it's pretty easy to define, actually. Were they paid in some way to do those things? If yes, then it was advertising.

>>tcfunk+2Q
It sounds like the most common way to do these things is to have one company operate one gambling and one non-gambling site and just tell people they operate the other site on each. No money's changing hands, so that's not advertising. Then you can advertise to go to your non-gambling site, and they can organically navigate to the gambling site which was disclosed, not advertised. You would almost have to ban companies which have any interest in a gambling product from advertising anything at all.

>>mminer+z71
That sounds like a conspiracy and the penalties for conspiracy are much more severe than just illegal advertising.

>>Teever+LT1
Conspiracy to do what? Advertise? We already established it's not advertising.