9September2026. Root acquisition CLOSED at the recipient marketplace/rule breakpoint. This packet connects documented sources of pressure and offered integrations without treating every list as a court finding or every available control as executed action.
The undated live [IAB IWL guide](http[local research file] says PIPCU established the list with IAB UK, IPA, ISBA and rightsholders, and calls it police-verified. It describes an API, encourages advertisers/agencies/intermediaries to use the list in buying/selling/trading, and explicitly recommends incorporating its data into contracts and processes. Access requires requesting PIPCU authorization and authenticated users. No access was requested. This is industry guidance promoting contract adoption; no executed advertiser contract is supplied, and the word new beside API does not date a2026 launch. Police review and exact rights remain Carver's distinct source lane.
The current official [LCCP16.1.1](http[local research file] heading through its complete three-part condition, applies to all licences. It requires operators to avoid placing digital ads on sites providing unauthorized access to copyrighted content; take all reasonable steps regarding relevant contracted third parties; and ensure contracts enable prompt termination when the licensee reasonably considers that a third party placed such ads. The termination capacity is subject to applicable dispute-resolution provisions. This is a requirement to hold a contractual right, not an unconditional order to exercise it every time a list changes. The condition itself neither names IWL nor makes inability to verify customer identity the trigger.
The regulator's [13June2017 announcement](http[local research file] expressly links OperationCreative to the licence condition introduced the preceding October and encourages operators to obtain IWL access. It reports an87% fall in gambling ads on infringing sites over the preceding12months. The historical start is the regulator's account; current wording was separately read. The percentage is an attributed aggregate outcome, without acquired sample/method/counterfactual or operator-level records. No revenue total follows from an ad-count percentage. This establishes a sector-specific route from regulatory responsibility to private contracts, with the list promoted as an aid, rather than a universal legal force attaching to list membership.
[Thinkbox's January2018 parliamentary supplementary evidence ADV0038](http[local research file] read in full, reproduces accounts from anonymous AgenciesA/B/C. A describes combining PIPCU, private research, client fraud teams and internal vetting; B describes contractual approved-placement requirements, manual vetting, real-time URL/app matching and an always-on exclusion list with PIPCU among its sources. These are agency statements mediated by Thinkbox, not named client contracts or independently observed deployments. Do not identify the anonymous firms from the vendors they mention.
The distinction between ad blocking and revenue denial is material. Thinkbox's own paragraphs14–15 question effectiveness and say some verification happens after purchase, allowing payment despite a blank replacement ad. This is an attributed limitation, not independent transaction evidence. It nevertheless defeats an inference that every blocked creative necessarily stops every corresponding payment. AgencyA also reports investigating inconsistencies and updating lists; this is not a worked publisher challenge or recipient-wide correction trace.
White Bullet's [25June2018 announcement](http[local research file] describes signing the EU advertising/IP memorandum and offers two different data products. Its GlobalPiracyIndex is said to combine court-order sites and infringement-list initiatives worldwide. Its separate IPIIndex is advertised as assessing sites beyond court/enforcement adjudication, using machine learning and specialist criteria. These are vendor claims, not an audited database, proven PIPCU-specific feed or a newly acquired EU agreement. No operational list was opened and marketing accuracy/completeness claims are not adopted.
The vendor's [5May2021 WIPO announcement](http[local research file] calls WhiteBullet a WIPOALERT member and describes official national-list information alongside its own tracked content/risk assessments. This supports an attributed membership/combined-offering account, not a dated executed WIPO licence or item-by-item ingestion proof. Linnaeus separately supplies WIPO's actual public rules; any differences in scope prevail over a broad promotional description.
Its 26May2021 Peer39 announcement.
The next proof would be a dated recipient agreement or actual configuration identifying which source lists are selected, the trigger for blocking/cessation, pre-bid versus post-purchase placement, and a correction or reconciliation record. A list-entry reversal alone cannot prove that an advertiser resumed spending. A named vendor or offered integration is a real commercial connection but is weaker than an executed case.
Discovery also returned a [D3 procurement record](http[local research file] identifying FTS037229-2026 / ocds-h6vhtk-0689ed, a reported WhiteBullet advertising-monitoring award ofGBP74520. That amount, award and scope remain a THIRD-PARTY LEAD. The exact official notice reader failed and one ordinary GET returned403; neither original nor primary readable notice was acquired. No signed contract, payment or funding-to-metric claim follows. The Stotles lead route also failed and is closed. This is a named record target for a future new credible source, not permission to keep trying the same failures. No procurement award from this lead is promoted into the accepted graph.
Two original HTMLs are retained: recipient-iab.html SHA25635188162720124f1a7b7113f2ead35ce9633023d72f86c2a2637b67647b778bc, and recipient-peer39-marketplace.html SHA256a5ed833b584f5744cc4fe7aca6898bd5b1c15274f65b504a96b6b38136b32660. Root fully read IAB's four substantive sections from its reader and then a scoped original extract; initial whole-page output truncated and was replaced by that complete section read. Root read Peer39's substantive page through its reader and verified original heading/marketplace description/WhiteBullet card. No images or forms were used.
GC condition/news, Thinkbox and the2018WhiteBullet ordinary GETs returned403; error files are not originals. Their successful official/vendor readers supplied the scoped text. The two2021WhiteBullet articles were fully read through their vendor reader, excluding related-post snippets/marketing footer as new research; no repeated GET to the already failing host. Reader-based summaries and locators are in recipient-reader-scopes.json; these are derivatives, not facsimiles. The notice failed both primary routes. Exact status/hash facts are in recipient-captures-initial.json and recipient-peer39-capture.json. Search discovery included unsuccessful named-vendor/contract queries and noisy unrelated acronym results; those were excluded, not evidence of absence. No operational list, account, advertising endpoint, contact, purchase, public release, case edit, ZIP or visible app was used. Acquisition closed for independent review and combined forest.