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

Thanks for responding about this issue. Is it coincidence that both 80/20 and Phorm have associations with B-M? You can probably appreciate that it looks a bit odd. It's also hard to understand how a company whose sole purpose is to put a convenient spin on controversial issues, could have anything to teach a company such as yours which is surely anti-spin. Let alone be needed to do something as mundane as organise meetings. This just doesn't seem to make any sense.

Say we were to suppose that B-M can also act for 'good' as well as in the service of corporate greed - and so could be useful in making the public aware of privacy issues. OK, but then there would be a clear conflict with B-M acting for Phorm - they couldn't be batting on both sides, could they?

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

Welcome to the forums Simon. I haven't posted much recently but I have been reading your comments with great interest. Thank you for spending the time here on a sunday to reply to us.

I am curious as to whether the PIA will deal at all with the issue of function creep and whether you have any thoughts on that issue that you are able to share with us?

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

According to the introduction to your First Stage (Interim) Privacy Impact Assessment For Phorm Inc., the commissioned work involves the following elements:

• Auditing the privacy policies.

So you are conducting an audit?

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

See, this is what happens in the hothouse. Phorm isn't a strategic partner, B-M is. How many of you have actually read through the 80/20 site?

As for accusations that we formed 80/20 especially for Phorm, please get a life. Phorm is a middle size startup. If we're to make an impression in the corporate privacy world we have to go well beyond that, which is what we intend to do. Have you looked at our privacy courses? Other clients? Our own plan for funding developing countries?

I'm sure this issue and Phorm are hugely important to all of you, but please don't assume that I or 80/20 see it as the Great Armageddon. There are critically important issues of the gravest magnitude out there, some - in many countries - involving life and death situations because of intrusion into personal information by authorities.

We are committed to the Phorm process just for that reason. It's a process. And that's fairly well unique in the corporate world. If you see me as the enemy then your world has become too small and your perspective too foggy.

I thought engaging on this forum was the right thing to do, but in between abusive and hostile posts, conspiracy theories, groundless accusations, spurious attacks and absolute misrepresentation of some facts I'm starting to have my doubts. My apologies to those of who who have been civil.

And Alexander, my apologies to you too. I get around 300 emails a day and I don't have enough hours in the day to get back to everyone.

As for the other questions, those answers can wait until the PIA has been published.

Simon

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

I respectfully suggest you re-read the original comment. I interpreted it as B-M had referred Phorm (being as B-M are a strategic partner.) I don't think anyone has suggested Phorm are a strategic partner.

With regards the apology for not replying to my email, that's fair enough, I get a lot of emails too. however, I would like to point out that my email was sent as a "reply" to your reply to me with regards to whether or not a comment on The Register was posted by you. I accept it may have been lost in your inbox, but it just seems odd that you replied to my first email and failed to reply to the second, which I presume would have been threaded by your email client as they all had the same subject as far as I remember. Anyway back on topic...

Alexander Hanff

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

I realise that there is a lot of information around this issue that Joe Public does not get to know and that, when not in possesion of the full facts, certain conclusions can be easily reached that may be totally erroneous. However, with partial disclosure comes the spectre of misperception. It's easy and quite natural.

Simon, it sounds as if you have quite innocently become embroiled in an issue that you consider to be at the lower end of the scale in the great scheme of things. Hopefully, you won't decide to focus your efforts elsewhere. True, the situation here is not life threatening and, is therefore, not of global importance. Yet. There is a steady erosion of privacy and liberty here and, because we can see how badly it can turn out in other parts of the world, our society needs people of your experience to nip it in the bud.
I think your involvement with Phorm would have been much better received if it hadn't been on a commercial basis. If PI had come out and said that Phorm's system was a privacy advance then more people would have taken notice.

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

I said - did the strategic partner make the referral. Obviously I mean B-M - who said Phorm were your strategic partner? It's perfectly clear that Phorm is your client.

Is this critically important work of PI or 80/20?

What is the Phorm process? How are processes unique in the corporate world?

You have allowed yourself to become the story. Can you think of any way to recover that situation?

Why? Most of the unanswered questions are not about the PIA.

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

In support of dav's post above, I would strongly suggest that you don't play this issue down as trivial in the grand scheme of things. Yes there are other issues in the world which are a life and death situation but accusing people of being narrow minded is not a good way to win favour or support.

Furthermore, irrespective of whether there are "critically important issues of the gravest magnitude out there" as a professional company you should be treating all issues equally. I would be very disappointed indeed to find out that you haven't treated this issue as seriously as you would others because it is not a life and death situation, you are supposed to be neutral remember. By "you" I refer to 80/20 Thinking as a whole not you as in Simon Davies.

This issue has touched a very raw nerve with the population of the UK (and if it was just an insignificant minority it would not have received anything like the publicity it has had in the press and media, so rest assured this is a national concern not just some geeks with their knickers in a twist). If it wasn't for all the publicity over the past 12 months regarding breaches of data protection regulations it is likely the public would have merely blinkered this issue out of their lives (like most other issues). Phorm's strategy to launch this despite the public being more aware of privacy issues than ever before, was not a very wise one.

Alexander Hanff

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

I have.

Inference is that I don't have a life. I have a very rich life thank you sir in so much that I have been semi-retired for 7 years now and am in my 40's. My life is such that I don't see this issue interfering in anything I might normally do. I implied that you have started up the company with the Phorm contract in the bag. You had something going I don't doubt. If I had started my business with no prospective clients I expect I'd still be working for less than I'm worth for someone else. I'm aware of your client list that you say you acquired 'within weeks'. New business ventures in a relatively untried sector don't miraculously hit the ground running.

Hear Hear.
But what does this have to do with us or 80/20 Thinking? Those would be matters for a privacy rights organisation such as Liberty or the European civil liberties network and not those of a company whose mission is to improve consumer trust for anyone who hires them.

I'm sorry if I personally have offended you with any of my comments. I know I can be brusque, especially when I'm being led around the houses. This would probably be the best place for you to have these conversations however you surely are not so naive as to think that on any public forum, no matter how knowledgeable some members are, that there will always be an element that will attack you?

I've tried not to say anything today that I did not know as fact and even my comment about the relationship between Phorm and yourselves was made clearly stating it as a personal opinion.

Once again, sorry you've had a bad day. I still don't wish to be hostile or abusive towards you but it is difficult to always express sentiment on a forum whilst maintaining ones stance.

Regards

Craig.

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

I might be wrong here, but I think, publicly at least, B-M's appointment as one of Phorm's many PR outfits was well after 80/20's initial PIA, so, if anything (and it probably ISN'T anything) the referral would be the other way round.

I, for one, am pleased that Simon has chosen to post here, and await the final PIA with interest. I should point out, however, that even if Phorm is found to be acting within the law, it soesn't make what they are doing - gathering 'clickstream' data purely for commercial gain, any more attractive.

Was 121 ever actually found to be acting ILLEGALLY?

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

I wasn't suggesting anyone had referred anyone, merely pointing out that it appeared Simon had misread the original comment.

Alexander Hanff

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

Sorry, I should have quoted the original comment, rather than your post.

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

I wish I had seen this before now. I am gobsmacked I have been speaking to the same gentleman that said this.

http://www.privacyinternational.org/...]=x-347-560886

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

As for the PIA, there has not yet been a response to these questions to Simon about how the ICO's process is being followed:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...omment-1046919

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

Of course I don't mean to imply you or anyone else is narrow minded. That wasn't my intent, and it would be plain wrong and rude to say so. I'm merely trying to point out that on a day to day basis I have to balance a very unpleasant spectrum of privacy issues, so I hope you can understand where I'm coming from. In some respects I'm angry at myself for spending so much precious time dealing with people's perceptions rather than the hard reality of my tasks as an activist. Many of you are deeply disappointed and angry with me, but I am getting old and I don't know how much time I have left to stand Canute-like before this awful tide. I am alleged to be the most ferocious privacy activist around, and yet I have singularly failed to stop the encroachment of the surveillance society, even with so much help from people like yourselves.

That doesn't mean I treat the Phorm issue any less seriously than you would wish. However I am also aware of the tectonic shifts that are happening in the online world and I'm doing my best to position myself, and others, so we can best understand and engage.

I have been reluctant to say this, because it's really nobody's business but my own, but I have not personally received a penny from Phorm. 80/20 has, but I am not drawing any salary or retainer from 80/20. The money goes to the development of the organisation and to the causes that we seek to help. In the future, I may draw a salary, but not now or in the forseeable future.

Simon