BobR wrote:
The operating limitations say it clear enough, "No person may operate
this aircraft for carrying persons or property for compensation or
hire." It means specifically that the aircraft may not be the source
of revenue.

The plain wording does not specifically mean that. The FAA may
interpret it as such but that interpretation does not follow
from the plain wording. The plain wording does not prohibit
other activities for hire.

Observing that the operating limits COULD have been written
as "No person may operate this aircraft in any manner such
that the aircraft is the source of revenue." then logically
one SHOULD presume that operating the aircraft such that the
aircraft is a source of revenue is allowed so long as that is
done without carrying passengers or cargo.

Using the plane to carry a paying passenger is using the
plane as the source of revenue.

Yes.

Using it to carry cargo is also use
for revenue.

No, only if the owner/pilot is PAID to carry the cargo, but
I presume that is what you mean.


On the other side, using your own experimental plane to take aerial
photographs for your own business is not using the plane for the source
of revenue, the source of revenue is the photographs and you are
entitled to using your own plane for that purpose.

Suppose he was hired to simply flyover a party for entertainment.
Legal or not? (boring, perhaps, but that is not the point.)

You could not
however, use the same plane for providing the same service to another
person or company. See the difference?

By which I presume you mean he could not allow another person or
company to lease or rent the plane for those purposes. However,
again, that does not follow from the plain wording. Are there
other restrictions on leasing or renting experimentals regardless
of purpose?

--

FF