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

Thats referring to 80/20 thinking who are conducting the PIA and as far as I am aware neither Richard Clayton nor Nicholas Boehm (the two who were invited for the technical analysis meeting and produced the 10 page report) are members of 80/20 thinking.

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

You have to be careful about accepting anything reported on any site as fact unless substantiated by references and citations. All comments should be taken as an opinion of the author and it is far safer to accept them as just that.
It is better to offer counter opinions based on informed knowledge than to continue to attack individuals with spurious allegations of misconduct or misdeed.

I don't doubt you are any more angry than many of us here but we have to offer intelligent and precise counter-argument rather than offer what surely amounts to abuse?

We need to be better than that. Like it or not you have to accept that Phorm Inc. have every right to try and enter this market with their business model and I don't doubt that on some level they will succeed. This is possibly the largest global market that there will ever have been and Phorm will not be the only players. The only thing we can hope to do is to ensure that they do it within the parameters of every applicable law and that we ensure that people operating such systems give non-consensual users every opportunity to be apart and distinct from the technology.


I look forward to the account of tonight's meeting for it will only be afterwards that we are better informed and in a position to discuss where our efforts might be best directed.

---------- Post added at 18:37 ---------- Previous post was at 18:33 ----------

You are of course, correct. Richard and Nicholas were there purely by invitation and in an independent role. I'm of the understanding that areas of their report were amended to correct inaccuracies about the technology and those amendments were agreed by both parties.
That is to be expected and anyone would insist that in such a high stake area nothing is said that is misleading. There must be fairness adopted throughout the whole debate.

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

I think this is the key problem I have with the technology. It is so obviously skating thin ice as far as the law is concerned. The problem seems to be which laws should apply. We see Phorm and BT playing one set of laws against another, one department against another. The one thing this debate has illustrated is that the (new?) law needs to be much clearer.

There will be a host of companies waiting in the wings once Phorm is in general use and you can bet that their proposals will be way beyond anything currently proposed by Phorm.

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

The London Meeting

Quick!

Live updates! :hyper:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technolog...ate_londo.html

(Spotted by Frank Rizzo on BadPhorm)

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

Thanks. Gotta love Simon Davies trying to make the (il)legality issue irrelevant. I have no doubt Alexander will not let him get away with that.

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

Indeed. We are the thin edge of the wedge and Phorm are doing their utmost to convince the FTC in the US that they comply with all their rules on behavioural targeted advertising. What's more worrying is that I understand that the FTC are looking to legitimise behavioural targeting as an acceptable medium.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080414/20080414006002.html?.v=1

My main issue with the whole process has always been this.

I still fail to see how the proposed technology allows for a user to truly 'switch off' Phorm's service as there seems no way as of yet to be a proposed system to allow Virgin users to avoid the DPI system regardless of the fact we will not be served the adverts. I think this is where any legal challenge must be levelled however we simply can not begin to prepare such a challenge until the technology is in operation and we understand how Virgin are implementing it because as yet it is just conjecture.

I also think it is time to move away from the 'personally identifiable information' point as Phorm quite possibly do comply within the law on this and it is why all of their statements continue to roll out the spin. Far less clear is the 'interception of communications' point and I feel this is where a battle can be fought unless of course the law lords change the goalposts on us. I don't doubt that the government will see this as a technology that should be implemented and not for any surreptitious snooping activity they can tap in to ( I don't believe they need to, they will have that already covered IMO ) but purely because of the huge tax revenue to be had from this market.

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

i also posted that in the other official PIA thread #46

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

Posted on the blog comments in the hope that Darren can get to read it.




Edit. It looks like he won't see it as once again comments on BBC blogs are borked.

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

Not sure about 'the only reason the public have issues with it - legality'. I'd have issues with it whether or not it is legal

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

This is the sort of misdirection and spin that really makes my blood boil. Surely his point is irrelevant to the issue. How does the fact that they may have questioned RIPA make them any less able to question legality under RIPA given that RIPA exists and the law is written?

---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:32 ----------

I understand but once a legality is proven ( should it turn out that way ) then your issues can only be dissatisfaction with your ISP for using the system and at that point all we can do is vote with our feet until we have no refuge left.
If the worst comes to the worst you live near me and I'll take you for a beer and we can bemoan our fate in one of the establishments on Washway Road ;)

edit:/ go on Richard, give them hell ;)

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

:clap:

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

I've just tried posting the following, but I get a 502 service not available error.
Anyone else getting this?
----------------------
Thanks for doing this Darren. So many of us had no chance to get there given the fairly short notice and the early start time. (No real chance if you work outside London).

"But unless there are senior legal counsel here to reflect we will end up with a bunfight."

So why didn't 80/20 or Phorm arrange one, to go on public record, rather than dismiss one of the key issues?

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

mmm...:beer:

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

Sorry popper for not replying to this sooner, been out all day only got back an hour ago - I do want to get a news item up on recent developments. But this thread sure moves fast ... :angel:

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

...Alexander has good support -

Dr Clayton wraps up saying: "It has to be informed opt in. I don't think it improves the stability of the internet. I think it's downright ilegal in the UK."