James Governor's Monkchips

Case Closed: Gartner Apologises

Share via Twitter Share via Facebook Share via Linkedin Share via Reddit

Gartner Vendor Relations: “You were right; quite honestly, I misread the context of the link. Please accept my sincere apologies for asking you to take it down from your blog. There are no copyright restrictions around listing public urls in blogs.”

Thanks Gartner – this is the right way to do things. Glad we could resolve the situation amicably.


  1. Call me cynical but I reckon that response only happened ‘cos it was starting to meme….

  2. James, just catching up on this series of events. Gartner sent a nastygram to ebizQ as well over my recent post about the BPMS magic quadrant (http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/column2/archives/2006/06/gartner_bpms_ma.php). The email (also from Gartner’s Vendor Relations) included the line “In future, if your analysts are going to use Gartner data in their blogs, the Gartner data must be submitted to Vendor Relations in the full context in which it will appear for review and approval.”

    Aside from the fact that I’m not an ebizQ analyst (they only host my blog and have no editorial control over my content), I found the idea that using any “Gartner data” in my blog requires a trip through Gartner’s Vendor Relations for approval to be laughable. What constitutes “Gartner data”? A URL? A quote from a report? A precis of a podcast?

    You might have your apology, possibly due to the meme factor, but they still have a long way to go.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *