That's an interesting question.
I would say that 'associated' is a rather vague word to use in these circumstances and if it was meant to be interpreted in the way you suggest, then they would have use a word like 'attached,' or 'included'
As they used the word 'associated' I would say that the original intention was that the more sensible 'cross pollenating' interpretation would be applied.
That's the one I have applied so far.
MJ
