I am certainly no regs lawyer, so could someone tell me where this
"commonality of purpose" clause is?

I have read several examples that say I can take a customer of mine on a
trip related to business so long as the business is not transporting that
person to the destination. Now you are saying that because I want him to
buy something from me I can't do it?

Also, how ridiculously stupid is this going to get? If you are a
politician, you can't take anyone flying because you may one day be seeking
their vote or contribution?

I can't fly anyone from my company with me because I am obviously currying
favor there.

How about a doctor flying a patient for treatment into the big city to see a
specialist?

I think someones hyper sensitive lawyer went overboard somewhere.



"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
You are forgetting that if it can be construed that the pilot may garner
favor from the passenger then the flight is commercial. If I, a securties
analyst, offer a ride to somenone (to see his dying spouse) who works for
a
company in a sector that I follow and I pay all the expenses, it is
prohibited under the regs. Even if I was previously planning to practice
landings at different airports, it is still a prohibited flight if I take
this passenger. The government is requiring me to be a jerk

Mike
MU-2


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
No you cannot because you do not have commonality of purpose. Its
just
one
of those cases where the government requires you to be a jerk.

The government does not require you to be a jerk. It simply requires
that
if you choose to be a Good Samaritan, you don't accept any compensation,
not
even the usual pro-rata share of direct operating expenses.

Pete