3) Networks and consultants have been trading, or offering lists of affiliates for years and years. Complete with personal contact information. Rumor has it that many managers have passed or swapped these lists around.

Well there we have it. MPeters my guess is that you’re not going to hear any affiliate manager or network stand up against this. Apparently it’s a common industry practice for affiliate information to be flipped around like pancakes.

I recommend everyone read the above article. I found it very forthright and something every affiliate needs to know. I may not have *liked* the message, but I appreciate the information.

One positive about all this – I’m a lot less naive than I was yesterday!

Linkshare and Performics had better sue him or they will be sued.

At the very least, they are liable under financial privacy laws AND stalking laws in California. If I were a lawyer for Performics or Linkshare, or even Afftrack, I’d start studying California law around these issues. Y’all are exposed!

An Affiliate Union would destroy the world as we know it! j/k, but I do agree that this list is only the start. I think a precedent has now been set and that any pretense of privacy is gone. No turning back as that door has been opened.

I think the difference between selling contact information (as you mentioned above) is that it’s just – contact info. It doesn’t flag people as ’super affs’, their earning power and how they’re doing it (websites listed).

What’s unique about the web is that any mickey mouse can come along and copy what we’ve built. If we can’t trust the people we’re working with to respect our need for privacy and discretion, and at the very least – keep our websites private – who the hell can we trust?