From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31335 invoked by alias); 2 Mar 2010 23:29:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 31311 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Mar 2010 23:29:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from virtual.bogons.net (HELO virtual.bogons.net) (193.178.223.136) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:28:56 +0000 Received: from jifvik.dyndns.org (jifvik.dyndns.org [85.158.45.40]) by virtual.bogons.net (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.2) with ESMTP id o22NSrt22027 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 23:28:54 GMT Received: from [192.168.7.9] (unknown [78.32.57.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by jifvik.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D543FE1; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 23:28:53 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4B8D9F34.5060606@jifvik.org> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:29:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100225 Fedora/3.0.2-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Schuilenburg Cc: ecos-maintainers@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: Commercial postings on ecos-discuss etc References: <4B892F8D.5090104@ecoscentric.com> <4B8D1877.4060106@jifvik.org> <4B8D4ABD.3060305@ecoscentric.com> <4B8D709E.3030606@jifvik.org> <4B8D9B39.8080905@ecoscentric.com> In-Reply-To: <4B8D9B39.8080905@ecoscentric.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 On 02/03/10 23:11, Alex Schuilenburg wrote: > Jonathan Larmour wrote: >> >> Where do we draw the line with "commercial benefit"? Adverts? Research? >> Surveys? Signatures? Email addresses? Indirect references? Mentioning >> the company name anywhere in a post? It is too far to say there must be >> /no/ commercial benefit. >> > Of course not, lets not get silly. I was suggesting nothing other than > making clear the details of the survey, especially coming from a > respected person such as a maintainer. And what I was meaning is that the line between commercial and not commercial may always be a bit woolly. >> We can't condone an allegation with insufficient information. >> > I not sure what you mean. I meant really, it's over to John, as per the clarifications requested in my previous mail. > If you are asking me for information, then what I can say is that any > survey taking place by, for or on behalf of a UK company has to conform > to the DPA. You can search for companies registered here: > http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/search.asp > > ICO registration of course also does not automatically make the survey > conform to the DPA... Ah. Again I think over to John. Jifl