Permission, availability and legal suitability are three separate gates. A price sheet answers none of them completely.
The US Copyright Office explains that permission or a licence is one route to lawful use, while recognising that exceptions can apply. For commercial procurement, request express permission for the intended use rather than treating public accessibility as evidence of a licence. This is a diligence recommendation, not a conclusion that every embed necessarily infringes without separate permission. (copyright.gov)
For US-facing editorial and affiliate pages, promotional disclosure is another distinct issue. FTC guidance explains that material commercial connections can require clear disclosure; the presence of a non-wagering demo does not settle the presentation of surrounding endorsements or affiliate relationships. Obtain appropriate advice for the actual page and business model. (ftc.gov)
Request written answers to:
- Which legal entity supplies the service and has authority to permit this distribution?
- Which studios, titles, versions, domains and territories are covered?
- Are iframe embedding, external linking, asset reuse and self-hosting treated differently?
- Are wagering promotions, affiliate links or particular destination operators restricted?
- What tracking, advertising or additional monetisation is present?
- What happens when a title becomes unavailable or upstream permission changes?
- What notice, export and termination assistance is available?
For Slots Launch users, also request a signed-launch migration plan. Its documentation says unsigned requests will be rejected after the November deadline unless legacy mode is enabled, and describes the catalogue API as a synchronisation service rather than a live source for each visitor page load. (docs.slotslaunch.com)