Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseQuinn
if you read this thread no one likes the situation any more than you do. Fuze summed it up best here
banks (following regulations) need to know where money is being sent. failure to comply with those regulations means the sponsor programs won't have a functioning business bank. no business, no affiliates to pay. see how that works?
that's the reality, it's not a matter of liking it or blindly laying down and taking it. it's simply a choice between being in business or not. govs of all stripes in all jurisdictions have tightened rules over the years under the guise of preventing money laundering, terrorism, trafficking, etc. there's no ally in power on the side of privacy
like it or not, that's the reality of being on any side of online money transfers
|
From the post, it didn't sound like he was implying it was a bad thing. In fact, the main issue is that it isn't even relevant to the original post. It requires a very wild imagination to suggest that BANKS are requiring CCBill to KYC affiliate webmasters. Rather presumptuous and nonsensical. I think the best source to explain why CCBill is KYC'ing affiliate webmasters would be CCBill itself. And what is CCBill's excuse?