Originally Posted by ShellyCrash

Nooner bump!



The way I see it is pretty cut and dry. I don't see it at all as being a pissing match between two people. Let's take the names out of it and try to look at it objectively-

An affiliate saw a way to make a quick PPC buck that was not prohibited by the Sponsor's TOS. The affiliate was paid for 3 months on traffic he sent using this method.

When the Sponsor sourced the traffic and found it was coming from a keyword campaign they found questionable the affiliate should have been contacted and the Sponor site's TOS should have been updated.

Because the affiliate was not notified their traffic was no longer considered kosher, the TOS were not updated and the Sponsor program failed to contact the affiliate, the affiliate continued to spend money on the campaign for another few months until the non payment issue required direct affiliate / sponsor contact.

To continue to allow an affiliate to run a paid marketing campaign and continue to accept sales from this affiliate with no intention of paying them on the sales generated is dishonest any way you slice it. What it amounts to is a sponsor program using an affiliate to absorb PPC campaign costs they would have normally incurred themselves.