Flying Lawyer, I have attempted to consider how an educated lay person might understand the definition, and believe that such a person would find the concept which it expresses to be reasonably intelligible. It is of course virtually impossible for any piece of legislation to prescribe precisely the outcome in every conceivable situation, and those in doubt may need to seek legal advice. In a hypothetical case of free publicity, I would be inclined to regard the publicity as a benefit accruing to the aircraft operator. In such a hypothetical case, the operator might allow his or her decision to provide an aircraft to be influenced by the possibility of free advertising, in which case he or she could hardly be described as a naive innocent.
As to the possible motivation underlying questions such as that raised in this thread, you are perhaps more charitably inclined than I am in this respect. Note that the topic starter is looking for advice on advertising. Why push the envelope if you are not looking to see how many fivers you can stuff into it? It's a pity that all these PPL-entrepreneurs won't be able to set the costs of all this free advice against their profits. Ain't life unfair?
PS: FL, I'm at Blackstone Chambers, it would be a pleasure to meet you.
PPS: the CAA Summary explicitly makes the point that "valuable consideration" is wider than payment (last page)
Last edited by FNG; 26th April 2004 at 10:43.