Protection for Affiliates/Marketers

[i-gami]

An organization, which protects the interest of affiliates and marketers of online gaming has been needed for quite some time. Never has this been more evident than after recent developments regarding potential retroactive changes to partner agreements. Patterned after a successful organization, which protects the interest of players, this new organization will provide our branch of the industry with many needed protections.

Prompt payments, knowledgeable support - both technical and administrative, accurate tracking and statistics, responsible behavior by the affiliate program, and being treated fairly and equally with regards to your fellow peers are concerns of every affiliate / marketer, now they are concerns of (more to follow)

A tentative date of July 1st has been set for the sites official launch if you are interested in learning more or would like to get involved in the development stages please email me at igami@earthlink.net.

Thanks,

Brian

 

[Casinomeister]

What the hell??:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Can you tell the difference between the two sites? I hardly can. How much of eCogra's website did you rip-off to build the igami site? Even the damn logo's the same. Looks like you'll get real far with this - NOT - especially when you're pissing off the wrong people with stunts like this. Sheesh!

 

[i-gami]

Thanks for your support.

My primary concern here was to create an entity and unite marketers to combat retroactive changes etc. As it is apparent to even you, so is it to everyone that I modeled the site after a related concept I have openly admitted this in every release I have made thus far. (Both sites offer similar services one for players the other for marketers.)

I contacted you along with other individuals several days ago in confidence requesting your comments regarding the site and the concept of protecting the interest of marketers. Instead of providing your comments to me then, you chose to attack the venture and moreover myself now, prior to the release date I had stated to boot.

Thanks again.

 

[Casinomeister]

Thanks for your support.

My primary concern here was to create an entity and unite marketers to combat retroactive changes etc. As it is apparent to even you, so is it to everyone that I modeled the site after a related concept I have openly admitted this in every release I have made thus far. (Both sites offer similar services one for players the other for marketers.)

I contacted you along with other individuals several days ago in confidence requesting your comments regarding the site and the concept of protecting the interest of marketers. Instead of providing your comments to me then, you chose to attack the venture and moreover myself now, prior to the release date I had stated to boot.

Thanks again.

That's indefensible. I did not check out your site as requested by you in confidence, I just checked it out now after someone else contacted me to point out the "similarities" between your site and eCogra's. C'mon man! This is a rip-off of eCogra, and you know it.

And I think you mentioned the release date as 1 July which is tomorrow. Don't tell me you had a complete makeover planned for then. Sheesh! Gimme a break!

 

[Casinomeister]

Thanks for your support.

I don't need no smug remarks either. I don't support plagarized material.

 

[i-gami]

I truly detest getting drawn into a public debate, especially after I had already asked for your comments in confidence. In fact I had presented the site to numerous individuals and asked each for their constructive criticisms I did this prior to a tentative release date so that if comments like yours came back I could delay the release.

Perhaps I acted too hastily in putting together the site as a result of recent developments. My intentions are good and in no way shape or form scoundrel! I even contacted Andrew at eCOGRA and asked him for his comments. He had the courtesy and professionalism to respond with constructive criticism and praise the effort even pledging his support if I were to make a few changes.

I have offered my time and effort to better the cause of others - I in no way shape or form am looking to profit from it like others - and for my effort you choose to ignore my request for comments instead choosing to pompously post on your forums and your newsletter. THAT is indefensible it says a lot about the kind of person you are too!

 

[dominique]

Long as eCOGRA is aware and approves...

 

[i-gami]

Expired Image

Andrew expressed his concern that the logos / seals may cause confusion. IMHO they are similar but different enough to not cause confusion, but I would be willing to respect his comments.

I do fully respect him as he had the courtesy to contact me directly instead of ignoring my request for assistance and spouting off about it publicly.

I guess some just get off on that.

 

[rowmare]

I don't see what the fuss is about.

The logos are similar, but not the same. I see no other similarities. I had a sneak peak, also. I saw no similarities then, and I see none now. I think contacting i-gami privately and expressed a concern, rather than this public whipping, would have been a nice gesture.

I figure that if the logo is a problem, then egocra would complain - and the logo is easily changed.

i-gami is not competing with ecogra.

What i-gami is doing is something webmasters need, IMO, and I will support it.

This man is using his own time to make this organization - which is not profit motivated (what profit?). Let's be reasonable here!

 

[Casinomeister]

Expired Image

Andrew expressed his concern that the logos / seals may cause confusion. IMHO they are similar but different enough to not cause confusion, but I would be willing to respect his comments.

I do fully respect him as he had the courtesy to contact me directly instead of ignoring my request for assistance and spouting off about it publicly.

I guess some just get off on that.

Okay, the logos look just about exactly alike. Branding is important - and eCogra's brand is being copied. Andrew - being the cordial gentleman that he is - was probably being polite suggesting that these might be confusing. Well, I'm just calling shots as I see them - it's a copy.

As for content, the text was almost verbatim in some spots - especially in the disput mediation section. The layout for the entire site was basically the same. It was a copy.

Sure you may have had good intentions for this operation, but don't let this mask the fact or implication that you are using the work of others to present this operation.

And sure, I may have been a bit adamant about this, but I am dealing with copyright theft on a weekly basis. It is something I feel very strongly about. I do not get off on being outspoken on this. I have better things to do - also just to set the story straight - I am not a "consultant" for eCogra. I only support what they do in spirit, and I like what they are doing. If you would have copied WOL, GoneGambling, or even CNN I would have felt just as strongly about this, and been just as outspoken.

 

[Casinomeister]

Oh, and could you please put the "Crapmeister" site back up? I seemed to have missed this (being in different time zones and such). Thanks!

 

[Webzcas]

Oh, and could you please put the "Crapmeister" site back up?

Where was that!?

 

[greedygirl]

Where was that!?

Following Bryan's newsletter, iGAMI put up a bit of "editorial" on the page, launching into a tirade about "Crapmeister." Included in this was the same old, same old..."Bryan's only in it for the money" and "obviously he's threatened," and the other gem, "he clearly has his own agenda."

A couple hours later, the page was taken down.

 

[Webzcas]

Oh dear.

So it has nothing to do with Bryan's amazing prowess at the game of craps then?

Seriously though, talk about IGami shooting himself in both feet. Copyright Infringement, followed by attacking one of the leading casino player watchdogs in the industry. There is certainly one born every minute.

 

[i-gami]

I dont think the logos look "exactly" alike! There was no copyright infringement - none of the content from their site is on this one - PERIOD! For gods sake if I had felt like I had ripped off the eCOGRA site verbatim as Bryan states why would I have actually contacted Bryan B, Brian C, Ted L, and even Andrew B for their comments? Give ME a break!

Only one of those individuals mentioned logo/seal confusion Andrew he pledged his support, agreed to work together, and stated he would like to get involved in the initiative but I would first have to change the logo/seal. I told him that I would honor his concerns and look to design a new logo.

And, yes - I had put up something out of spite that stated the specifics related to Bryans attack

I provided the email where I had asked him for his assistance, comments and critique on the website. In that letter I even mentioned that the site was patterned after the eCOGRA site. I questioned why he would fail to give me the comments I requested yet publicly attack the project the circumstances/timing of events signified an agenda of so sorts was present. (Most have told me its entirely self-absorbent.)

My impression is - what a guy, I ask him for help, his comments and he goes behind my back and flames the crap out of me. What a wonderful person. Certainly I may have acted hastily but I was not worthy of being attacked in the manner, which Bryan decided to do.

Hopefully, the support and interest I have received can endure this unjust assault. As for the new logo maybe I should consider a variation of casinomesiters.

 

[spearmaster]

To be honest, I was asked to have a look at the site but I've been busy like crazy.

I only went when I saw a comment about similarities - and to be brutally honest, I took one look and immediately saw a big problem in the logo - and even the contact us form, which looks like eCOGRAs but some text was edited out, and some text very slightly changed, but clearly took the form and substance of the corresponding page on eCOGRA.

I left it at that and chose not to comment further - but I do feel now that I should at least express my reservations because this is looking a bit unfair.

While Brian may have had good intent in creating the organization, the way in which it was apparently done was not appealing, to put it very mildly.

 

[rowmare]

I am under the impression that Igami sent out a whole bunch of emails to industry leaders to view the site he was creating prior to launch, hoping for some constructive feedback. Emails that were apparently ignored until someone went behind his back to criticize.

Imagine what would have happened if those requested did look at the site, requested the needed changes be made, and the changes made. Could this conflict have been avoided? Do ya think??

I find how this is has been handled by leaders in the industry disturbing.

I do believe that talking with Brian privately, letting him get the feedback he honestly asked for and allowing him time to make desired changes would have been the honorable thing to do.

Here's a guy attempting to put something back into this industry, makes an error with similarities between sites (sites that are non-profit), requests reviews before even launching the site, (perhaps to avoid this exact thing from happening) and look how the shit hit the fan.

Is it any wonder so many webmasters are reluctant to stick their necks out in this business.

I am disappointed, "to put it very mildly".

 

[spearmaster]

Rowmare -

Normally, it is incumbent on the owner of a site or product to make sure that he/she is not flirting with a potential problem. Especially when there's even a reasonable chance that the "branding" may look like someone else's brand.

The fact that some of us did not immediately respond or visit the site does not make it our fault in any way whatsoever - we all have things to do and our comments or suggestions were not required in any way, just requested - so for you to put the onus on us is kind of unfair.

I'm sorry that you do not agree - but I didn't even plan on offering an opinion until I felt that Casinomeister was getting the short end of the stick, at which point I thought I should make my own opinion public.

If eCOGRA is willing to assist and help out then that is a good thing - but that does not change my initial perception of the situation. But in any case, please don't bind me to a contract or agreement that I did not enter into (ie. comments and suggestions on the site).

 

[rowmare]

Rowmare -

Normally, it is incumbent on the owner of a site or product to make sure that he/she is not flirting with a potential problem. Especially when there's even a reasonable chance that the "branding" may look like someone else's brand.

Is that not what he was doing by asking people to preview the site before launching?

Nobody was bound into a contract to make suggestions of comments about the site. It just seems unfair to me that this thread is going the way it is, when the webmaster did ask for opinions prior to launch.

 

[Casinomeister]

I am under the impression that Igami sent out a whole bunch of emails to industry leaders to view the site he was creating prior to launch, hoping for some constructive feedback. Emails that were apparently ignored until someone went behind his back to criticize.".

There was no going behind anyone's back - and no emails ignored. Let's not over-dramatize this.

Brian emailed me - asked me if I was interested, I said "no, I had enough on my plate." and wished him luck. He mentioned he was launching the site on the 1st. But then yesterday, I was contacted by another person stating disbelief and a link to the site - and I checked it out and was rather miffed that this is EXACTLY what webmasters deal with on a daily basis - plagerization and breaches of (perhaps pending) trademarks. I thought this was the live site!

Okay, I was a bit outspoken -- partially to blame are the a-holes who have ripped off my site here: Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) I got hot-headed.

So call it tough love then. Perhaps I did Brian a favor and got him to take immediate action before any lawyers did. And to be fair, I'm even running his launch in this week's news.
https://www.casinomeister.com/static/news/july2005.html

 

[i-gami]

I have nothing against Ted, he has always behaved in a professional manner, but I have to set the record straight here since he is stating he never agreed to anything.

On June 22 I contacted Ted about iGAMI he replied saying he had mistakingly deleted the email to resend it ... I did and he stated that "I would most certainly be interested in seeing an organization like this succeed. However, given my high-profile nature, I would more likely be an impediment rather than an asset."

I replied to him with "Would you care to at least comment on the concept and potentially review the sites preliminary design?" Going on to give him the url and asking for comments, constructive criticism etc

Ted replied "Sure thing. I am happy to help where I can here."

His comments never came ...

I agree with romware - this entire assault could have been avoided. I'm not going to restate my defense - youve heard it several times already.

 

[spearmaster]

If you know what you are doing is flirting with a potential problem, why do you keep doing it?

The whole point is, he could have been a lot more unique, and a lot less similar, had he taken the time to do so.

And I reiterate again - an opinion was invited from me and others - it was not required and to thus point the finger at us is entirely unfair. If I feel that people are going to expect my judgement simply because I was requested to offer an opinion, then I am simply not going to answer emails from now on - I would prefer to keep the freedom to make my own decisions on whether or not I wish to offer said opinion.

Instead, I took the time to respond to his email/PM, declined his kind offer for me to serve on the board, and wished him well.

Does that look callous or unthoughtful to you?

 

[i-gami]

Okay, I was a bit outspoken -- partially to blame are the a-holes who have ripped off my site here: Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) I got hot-headed.

Yes, that is the exact reason why I feel as if iGAMI was attacked you acted hastily as did I and let anger get the best of you. You failed to consider my previous attempts for assistance in the heat of the moment - so to speak.

Tough love - yah destroy a worthy cause before it even gets a fair chance to succeed. >smooch<

 

[spearmaster]

I replied to him with "Would you care to at least comment on the concept and potentially review the sites preliminary design?" Going on to give him the url and asking for comments, constructive criticism etc

Ted replied "Sure thing. I am happy to help where I can here."

His comments never came ...

... because as I have repeated before, I didn't even get a chance to visit the site until yesterday - and at that time thought better of offering an opinion at all.

Furthermore, I don't see anything there which implies that I need to meet a timeframe for offering an opinion or any constructive criticism.

Again, I am being held to standards which I did not agree to - and I continue to strenuously object. But this will be the last I will offer on this issue because to be quite honest I really am exhausted and busy like hell and not in the mood to get into semantics of the difference between "required" and "requested".

 

[rowmare]

Hey guys. I am sorry if I came on too strong here. The last thing we need is to be sparing with each other. I was just afraid to see a brave new venture falling by the wayside before anyone gave it a chance.

So call it tough love then. Perhaps I did Brian a favor and got him to take immediate action before any lawyers did. And to be fair, I'm even running his launch in this week's news.

I have had content copied, site hijacked - the whole nine yards - by unscrupulous webmasters - so I understand being sensitive to anything that comes close to copyright infringement.

Spearmaster: You are never thoughtless or callous, and you have always been true gentleman, and I respect both you and Bryan.