Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 547

Florence · 05-06-2008, 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by markt50

Wow,

Seems like you made a mistake and were man enough to admit to it, no big deal, no damage done. I hope they do indeed back off, although that would involve having a modicum of sense and an ability to show an understanding of the public's attitude from a PR point of view (Something both BT and Phorm have so far failed to do). If they do pursue you I'm sure there are enough people who support you to make it an absolute PR nightmare for them.

I just don't understand the world sometime, it seems it's OK for a huge corporation like BT, with the assistance of evil empire Phorm, to break the law millions of times with what appears to be no repercussions and a distinct lack of interest from the home office, yet the one time you step out of line (in their opinion) and they instantly look into suing you. You better be careful Alex, I hear Kent will be pushing for the death penalty

Anyway, hope it works out ok.

to prosicute Aleaxander would put the phorm webwise debait right out in the open and would be seen by many as the big cheese hiding something from those who are new to the circut totally bad publicity for Kent and BT.

Would hit the new properly and that is what they don't want really since the 30,000 internet users who dont know how it works would be able to read the news of this large company and Bt suing the small person so would start totake an interst in what it is about. They might learn too soon for BT that phorm/webwise is bad news...

Sirius365 · 05-06-2008, 23:46

Added the following to the DIGG comments

Code:

I'm unable to remove my (personal) remark regarding phorm/bt stealing money out of children's mouths. 

but am happy to put the record straight that they did NOT steal AD space from charity's
(they gave & sometimes took away :p )

but given the FACT they will have no idea if they are marketing to children/adults etc
some could say they are stealing from children's pocket money or adults pockets theu the nag factor.

 PHORM I STILL THINK YOUR SYSTEM STINKS ! & the covert way you along with BT trailed your scumware is disgusting. (report leak or not)

SCREW YOU

mark777 · 05-06-2008, 23:48

Men hold their hands up and admit mistakes. You've done that Alexander.

If the BT/Phorm juggernaut continue with the legal threats, it's for one reason only; they want to shut you up.

It was always going to get nasty and this just shows how worried they are.

tarka · 05-06-2008, 23:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by markt50

I just don't understand the world sometime, it seems it's OK for a huge corporation like BT, with the assistance of evil empire Phorm, to break the law millions of times with what appears to be no repercussions and a distinct lack of interest from the home office, yet the one time you step out of line (in their opinion) and they instantly look into suing you.

I agree, it quite frankly stinks that they have resorted to legal threats (and ironic as someone already pointed out). The statement has been retracted and an apology made (and I echo the supportive comments made already) and I hope that they do the sensible thing and pursue it no further.

Now perhaps BT/Phorm would afford us the same courtesy and explain why they told the ICO that the trial was anonymous when it wasn't (they knew the ip addresses of those participating) and why they also told the ICO that no ads were served during the trial when it is quite clear in the document that they did serve ads (which by taking the steps they have done today they are confirming was the case).

Florence · 05-06-2008, 23:56

I think a link to the leaked document should go to the ICO.

mark777 · 06-06-2008, 00:12

OhMeGod !!

Just remembered.

I sent all the details to Private Eye.

rogerdraig · 06-06-2008, 00:28

cant see them going all the way in taking you to court on this as you point out they said they didn't use adds

in court they would be hard pushed given that they have denied they used adds in expecting any one to assume that those adds mentioned were anything to do with them let alone being bought and used by them

don't think even to most out off touch judges or sceptical juries would see it their way

plus from the point of view of what they told other people it now seems they wont be able to say we didnt know as they had the information to counter your statements so fast it hardly seems it was hard for them to find !

Florence · 06-06-2008, 00:32

lol I have been reading my literature on children with special needs compulsive disorders and dyslexia.

Ok first, children with special needs many are hyper active unable to concentrate for more than a few mins. Making reading the opt-in or opt-out of webwise impossible to them plus the name is one that has been used for children’s learning with BBC so would confuse them.
Second, Dyslexia The most common learning disability is dyslexia. A person with dyslexia has difficulty with language skills, especially reading. The International Dyslexia Association says studies in different countries generally show that four to seven percent of people are dyslexic.
Dyslexia most commonly affects reading, spelling and writing. Some people have problems with only one of these. Others have trouble with spoken language. They find it difficult to express themselves clearly or understand what other people say.

Third, Obsessive-compulsive disorder or over-compulsive disorder[citation needed] (OCD) is a psychiatric anxiety disorder most commonly characterized by a subject's obsessive, distressing, intrusive thoughts and related compulsions (tasks or "rituals") which attempt to neutralize the obsessions.
The phrase "obsessive-compulsive" has worked its way into the wider English lexicon, and is often used in an offhand manner to describe someone who is meticulous or absorbed in a cause (see "anal retentive")[1]. Such casual references should not be confused with obsessive-compulsive disorder; see clinomorphism. OCD is distinguished from other types of anxiety, including the routine tension and stress that appear throughout life. Although these signs are often present in OCD, a person who shows signs of infatuation or fixation with a subject/object, or displays traits such as perfectionism, does not necessarily have OCD, a specific and well-defined condition.
There are people that if shown lots of adverts are compelled to buy and cannot control the urges to buy.
How do I prevent shopping binges?
Pay for purchases by cash, check, debit card.
Make a shopping list and only buy what is on the list.
Destroy all credit cards except one to be used for emergency only.
Avoid discount warehouses. Allocate only a certain amount of cash to be spent if you do visit one.
"Window shop" only after stores have closed. If you do "look" during the day, leave your wallet at home.
Avoid phoning in catalog orders and don't watch TV shopping channels. this would need adding cancel your BT broadband as this would no longer be a safe haven.
If you're traveling to visit friends or reltives, have your gifts wrapped and call the project finished; people tend to make more extraneous purchases when they shop outside their own communities.
Take a walk or exercise when the urge to shop comes on.
If you feel out of control, you probably are. Seek counseling or a support group such as Debtors Anonymous.

OldBear · 06-06-2008, 02:05

I hope Frank Rizzo is reading all this. He now has the proof he wanted to take back to the ICO. Ironically, the Tech Support he got was correct; he did have a spyware/adware problem. AND his pages were injected with javascript, and BT did know all about it, and... etc, etc.

OB

btw. Does anyone here have links to the stories about Kent's mob having to shut down some of his old businesses after the U.S. Legal Authorities were after him? I did have them, but seem to have lost them and it would be nice to remind him that he's not exactly averse to breaking the odd law himself.

Anyway, as far as I know (IANAL), stating an opinion and then withdrawing that opinion (like Mr Hanff did) is, (and this is for you, Emma S), "err... umm... stumble, stumble, blah, blah, drone, waffle, err... ummm... it's not illegal". You'd get laughed out of court IMHO.

Sounds to me like sour grapes because you've all been caught.

AlexanderHanff · 06-06-2008, 02:51

icsys · 06-06-2008, 02:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777

OhMeGod !!

Just remembered.

I sent all the details to Private Eye.

As long as you send the document and allow them to draw their own conclusions from the content there is nothing to worry about.

tdadyslexia · 06-06-2008, 02:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florence

Ok first, children with special needs many are hyper active unable to concentrate for more than a few mins. Making reading the opt-in or opt-out of webwise impossible to them plus the name is one that has been used for childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s learning with BBC so would confuse them.

That is true the children and adults with special needs, will find this confusing

Quote:

Second, Dyslexia The most common learning disability is dyslexia. A person with dyslexia has difficulty with language skills, especially reading. The International Dyslexia Association says studies in different countries generally show that four to seven percent of people are dyslexic.

It is 1 in 10 children and adults who are Dyslexic, I should know I am Dyslexic plus I set up a Group for Dyslexic's as well

Quote:

Dyslexia most commonly affects reading, spelling and writing. Some people have problems with only one of these. Others have trouble with spoken language. They find it difficult to express themselves clearly or understand what other people say.
[Snip]

That is 100% write, I am sorry to say.

popper · 06-06-2008, 02:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMHarman

http://news.bbc.co.uk/ > scroll down. At least it is linked from the front page today.
Top technology article today.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7438578.stm

hmm, is a rewrite in order there, or are they intentionally re-writing the facts to suit their personal stance?

"
During the trials adverts were stripped out of web pages served up to BT customers and replaced with more targeted ads, if available.

If none were available, adverts for one of three charities were inserted. "

icsys · 06-06-2008, 03:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by popper

hmm, is a rewrite in order there, or are they intentionally re-writing the facts to suit their personal stance?

"
During the trials adverts were stripped out of web pages served up to BT customers and replaced with more targeted ads, if available.

If none were available, adverts for one of three charities were inserted. "

I wouldn't worry too much about that... remember, 'no ads were used during the trials'.

Ravenheart · 06-06-2008, 06:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBear

btw. Does anyone here have links to the stories about Kent's mob having to shut down some of his old businesses after the U.S. Legal Authorities were after him? I did have them, but seem to have lost them and it would be nice to remind him that he's not exactly averse to breaking the odd law himself.

Try here OB

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/Sp...-Distribution/