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

It more than that tho - the two colours (albeit yours are red and black) and the circle. Makes them so similar

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

There is nothing wrong with being similar and trademark law is only applicable when the defendant's "mark" can be mistaken for the plaintiffs and have a negative effect on their business. Since the privacy site is nothing to do with computer games, doesn't sell computer games and doesn't relate to the gaming industry in anyway, there can be no accusation of "damage".

I am not even remotely worried that there might be a chance of a trademark dispute, I am confident the logo is fine from a legal standpoint. My spy is also hand drawn by me so it is not a derivative works. Plus their Spy is clearly wearing shades, mine has evil red eyes.

Alexander Hanff

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

I also wonder whether a privacy site should have a sinister logo? It's opposite to the message one wants to put across, perhaps.

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

I dont like it it looks like a logo for some ransomeware popups you see on the internet.


Whats up with The register not doing a phorm story ? about the new fipr letter.


Where are 80/20 and the Video.

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

Privacy in a corporate world is a sinister affair. I wanted to emphasise spying with a man in the middle metaphor. I think the logo gets the point across well, and being 2 colours it is good for printing. I do appreciate all the input though.

Alexander Hanff

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

I tend to agree with Julian.

Too complicated I know, but something like a person sat at a screen with another person behind him blindfolded would convey the message better.

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

I'm not being funny but do you think all this graphics stuff should be in a different thread?

Lets concentrate on the real issues of RIPA, DPA & Fraud and getting rid of Phorm

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

I am 99% serton that, that logo is from a police poster back in the 70s & 80s, it will be covered by the crown copyright.

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

Glad you appreciate the comments - I don't want to put you off!

I feel that the logo should be cleaner, and more professional looking. This one looks like a 6th form school project (you know - create a fake company etc).

Perhaps something much simpler? No grading colours etc (I used to work in the printing industry, and gradated colours can look pants on paper of not done right). Whilst I know you are doing a website (hence the Online) - will it ever require printing?

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

There is a flat colour version for printing.

Alexander Hanff

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

I'd prefer a positive logo to a negative logo - so it should depict what we are campaigning for, not what we are against.

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

Alex - your man in the middle reminds me more of Blair's Demon Eyes.

As for the gamespy logo they are showing the registered trademark symbol and yet I can't find that one registered here:

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tm/t-find/t-find-text/

There is a gamespy arcade registered but not gamespy with the green guy.

The rules are you can display TM without having to register that trademark but you can only use the ® symbol if registered.

BTW take a look at Phorm and Webwise applications on the IPO site...

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

Oh wow.

I wrote to my MP, Phil Willis, about this whole issue, informing him in my best laymans terms of the privacy concerns I had as well as the history of the people behind the Phorm/WebWise company.

To date I haven't had a reply but I did just notice that his name has been added to the EDM 1311.

I have never had this kind of success with a MP before and am quite shocked that in the space of 2 days, I have managed to get another name added to the EDM.

Now I am thinking what else I can do to help ;)

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

:welcome: windowcleaner
thats cool, but you have read the thread so far, and so realise we take a break from the core points you raise now and then, its good to generalise now and then and Alexanders new Privacy site is or will be an integral part of all this thread subject...

BTW Alexander can i reserve my email PO address's ;) assuming you do that alongside the news server/message board thing....etc

i was thinking a multicast tunnel for streaming video one off user generated broadcasts in the political 18DS style, if it ever gets that big, and the Co-Location kit can handle it.

anyway, back to windowcleaner's point, have you come up anything new,any new information or points we havent covered already given your fresh perspective after reading it all...perhaps a new spin on an old theme.

or perhaps you would like to recap and condense some of the points already raised and inspire some new direction, its all good so feel free to act and point out any loopholes we may have missed or forgotten. ;)

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

I was going to say something along these lines, as you say Alexander, two colours is better (the shading makes it more).

As for the man in the middle how about a caricature of Kent :p:

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

Kent Ertugrul's bad behaviour as referred to in my BT Beta forum post about Alexander's interview, with Kent Ertugrul "losing it", has popped up on the first page of a google search on "Kent Ertugrul". Felt quite pleased about that. It is a reminder that google is watching, and that can be used to advantage. It's reminded me to put the googleworthy stuff at the beginning of the post so it appears in the extracted text and to make sure the item I want highlighted appears with the search term in the page details.

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

He has just admitted he is the 17/18 year old American brettypoos.

It matters who he is simply because of all the nonsense he has been posting over and over again. Following the trail also shows some very intresting posts and other stuff around the web. He has been posing as a serious investor, a fact which is clearly untrue.


Also all of the posts saying how good phorm is. He has admited he has no problem with having his privacy invaded.

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

Ahh - he'll soon change that by using Phorm to alter any references to him to only show fabulous and lovely things about him (and Phorm). That really is scary - cos he/they could do that - the technology is there!

---------- Post added at 16:16 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

He is not the 17 year old American - he is a WUM - so don't believe anything he says

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

Following on from my previous post about getting my MP, Phil Willis, to sign the EDM about this issue, I have just read his website and found out that he is, in fact, the Chairman of the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee !!!

http://www.philwillis.org.uk/westminster/page1.asp

If anybody should be looking into this, I suppose he high up on the list ;)

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

Where has he admitted that? I've just looked at the discussion tab and can't see any sign of such an admission at the time of writing this. He/she agreed (15.22) with a post calling someone else a jerk (14.59) but I haven't seen any post admitting identity.

I'm not too happy with the direction this is going in - shouln't we avoid this sort of thing? The web is full of nonsense, doubtless I've written some of it myself. I think the Phorm share price will fall just as fast without brettypoos being outed or harassed.

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

Good result. None of the other members have signed it though. The members :-


Mr Phil Willis (Chairman), Harrogate and Knaresborough, Liberal Democrats
Adam Afriyie, Windsor, Conservative
Mr Robert Flello, Stoke-on-Trent South, Labour
Mrs Nadine Dorries, Mid Bedfordshire, Conservative
Linda Gilroy, Plymouth Sutton, Labour Co-op
Dr Evan Harris, Oxford West & Abingdon, Liberal Democrats
Dr Brian Iddon, Bolton South East, Labour
Chris Mole, Ipswich, Labour
Dr Bob Spink, Castle Point, Conservative
Graham Stringer, Manchester Blackley, Labour
Dr Desmond Turner, Brighton Kemptown, Labour

Anyone had replies from any of the others?

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

I second that - all getting a bit personal over on iii

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

You are right. I was getting wound up by all of the nonsense and junk that this person was posting. Making any sensible discussion impossible.

I am supprised that the shares have not dropped more today in the light of yesterdays news.

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

Well plans so far are:

Entire Site served over SSL (certificate already purchased)
The site will include news and information on existing publicity and political campaigns. Security Tools (cookie blacklists, Phorm checker and other relevant free security tools) as well as tips on how to maintain privacy. Legislation relating to privacy and relevant case law where it exists. Name and Shame table for ISPs and other corporations engaging in anti-privacy activities. Forums and SSL enabled IRC.

Future plans will include:
SSL Web Proxy
SSL Web Based Email

As part of the duties of the organisation, I will be (and hopefully others) in regular contact with privacy advocates and political representatives. Ideally I would like to get to the point this summer where I can register the organisation as a charity and do some fundraising to support development of new tools, features and resources and to lobby government for policy enforcement and reform as well as produce printed media for distribution to the general public.

I have other ideas but everything is still very much in the brain storming stage at the moment and I won't be able to dedicate my time to it until the end of May when I finish my degree. So I will use the time between now and then to fine tune plans and work on bits and pieces that won't take up too much time.

Alexander Hanff

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

Here's the committee
Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee Members

Member Constituency Party
Mr Phil Willis (Chairman) Harrogate and Knaresborough Liberal Democrats
Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods City of Durham Labour
Mr Tim Boswell Daventry Conservative
Mr Ian Cawsey Brigg and Goole Labour
Mrs Nadine Dorries Mid Bedfordshire Conservative
Dr Ian Gibson Norwich North Labour
Dr Evan Harris Oxford West & Abingdon Liberal Democrats
Dr Brian Iddon Bolton South East Labour
Mr Gordon Marsden Blackpool South Labour
Dr Bob Spink Castle Point Other
Ian Stewart Eccles Labour
Graham Stringer Manchester, Blackley Labour
Dr Desmond Turner Brighton, Kemptown Labour
Mr Rob Wilson Reading East Conservative

and AFAICS - only Phil Willis has signed the EDM 1311
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...52&SESSION=891

The lords has a Science and Technology committee with our friend the Earl of Northesk on it
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ct_members.cfm

Members

Members were appointed on 13 November 2007.

Lord Sutherland of Houndwood (Chairman)
Lord Colwyn
Lord Crickhowell
Lord Haskel
Lord Howie of Troon
Lord Krebs
Lord May of Oxford
Lord Methuen
Earl of Northesk
Lord O'Neill of Clackmannan
Lord Patel
Earl of Selborne
Lord Taverne
Lord Warner

Co-opted for the Systematics and Taxonomy inquiry:
Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior
Baroness Walmsley

Co-opted for the Personal Internet Security follow-up inquiry:
Lord Broers
Earl of Erroll

All easily accessible on parliament website
http://www.parliament.uk/

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

You, on the other hand, supposedly have a BIG problem with people's privacy being invaded. Isn't that what this is all about ?

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

Yeah we need to get off this silly streak on iii it does nothing for the cause at all. Stooping to the level of the very people we are fighting is not the way to win the battle and certainly won't get us anywhere closer to winning the war.

The best way to stop a troll is to ignore them.

Alexander Hanff

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

Thanks for this. I had a stooge around myself and amended my earlier post.

Oddly, I got a slightly different list of names from :-

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ee_members.cfm

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

:welcome: The Other Steve
agreed....

BTW not that im trying to track you OCYU LOL, but are you the same one posting on the reg etc, good to see you join the CF and the fight ;)

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

Yes, that's me, de-lurking to say hello, almost seems rude to have been following the thread for so long without saying anything at all.

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

El Reg carries a Home Office attempted cop out in response to the FIPR at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...phorm_fipr_bt/

Just passing through, btw.

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

Here we go:

Jamie beat me to it, link removed.

Alexander Hanff

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

Agreed. I think I will give it a wide berth for a few days and let things "settle" for a while unless there is major news.

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

Science and Technology committee is now dead. Long live the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee, which replaces it, and Adam Afriye isn't on it anymore, but Tim Boswell is.
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...us/members.cfm

The old S&T site still exists.
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ee_members.cfm
and its dissolution is described here
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta..._committee.cfm

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

So basically the Home Office have just stated:

"Our public statement was not based on any technical analysis or any legal analysis and is in fact not even worth the paper it is printed on. Phorm's shares are worth more than our statement, please ignore it."

Of course the irony here is that they state only the courts can make a legal judgement, yet they refuse to investigate the issue either themselves or through the police they control, in order to get the courts to make a judgement in the first place.

Alexander Hanff

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

Are we heading towards a judicial review in to the refusal of the HO and police to investigate?

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

I don't think it is going to come to that. The Home Office or the Police (under the instruction of the Home Office) will have to take action eventually, their position is completely untenable. With pressure from Europe, MPs, Lords and the Public, they really have no choice.

They will drag their heals and throw hissy fits first, but eventually something will be done.

That's my opinion anyway.

Alexander Hanff

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

My letter to the computer crime unit of the met police should have landed on their desk this morning. Will let ya'll know if anything comes of it. Lets just say that I aren't holding my breath.

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

I have this 70 year old picture of a BT executive in front of a microphone at Heston Aerodrome, saying

"...the settlement of the Phorm/Webwise problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all of the internet may find Phorm. This morning I didn't have another talk with Home Office, but here is the paper which bears Simon Watkin's name upon it although not mine, (waves paper to the PhormPRTeam - receiving loud cheers and "Hear Hears" ). Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you ...".

Later, from the dock of the court, the same executive, holding the same note, says, "My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Telecom executive has returned from Ertugrul bringing Phorm with honour. I believe it is Phorm for our time."

Apologies to Wikipedia. Permission for reproduction granted.

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

Probably for just long enough to make sure their own behinds are covered.

I think it's significant that they have taken pains, once again, to emphasise the actual status of the HO note. (e.g. it means essentially squat.)

It's not enough, but at least it seems that they are washing their hands of any responsibility for the reassurances of legality that BT/Phorm?et al claim to have had.

So, no Offcom, ICO is actually investigating them*, and no HO note.

I forget, who else did they say they'd asked ? Oh well, back to the letter writing.


*stop sniggering.

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

And when they are not compliant?

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

Firstly apologies if this comes across slightly incoherent, but I'm trying to get my ducks in a row.
Assuming BT has a legitimate technical reason to carry out these multiple trials, why haven't the other two ISP's also been doing trials? Does it possibly indicate that there might be an unknown agreement, (to us,) that BT is doing all the technical trials on behalf of all three ISP's.
If that is so, and it feels as though it could well be - to me at least; does that imply that if a legal challenge against the BT trials were successful, then the other two ISP's could well be implicated. At least, they could be seen to have encouraged an illegal act.

Colin

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

In which case, BT would (hypothetically) have to grass the others up, and try and negotiate a deal, or else they might (allegedly) be left with Phorm in the dock, BT for (allegedly) "doing" the crime and Phorm for (allegedly) inciting it. It'll be a while before anyone's in court.

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

Vm would have to do there own trials as there network is different to bt, therefore i still think vm have had some sort of illegal trial at some point, always the stance of we dont know if were in or out, never have i heard a statement of "i can state 100% vm held no trials in relation to phorm" from anyone and there silence gives me the feeling there hiding something :(.

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

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...orm_interview/

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

The second of my MEP replies - Labour this time.

Dear Mr Jones

Thanks for your email to *** about these issues. I will pass your comments
on to ***.

Concerning the issue with Phorm and ISPs, the Information Commission's
Office has advised that, in accordance with European Law, service providers
should only use agencies such as Phorm when the customer opts in to do so.
This seems to be the sensible way forward.

Yours truly

*** ***
Political Assistant to *** *** MEP
European Parliamentary Labour Party
Socialist Group

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

I just had a reply from Mr Bohm, I won't paste it because I never asked his permission, but he is looking into my concerns on complicit users and will try to read my paper over the next few days. His reply was a courtesy to acknowledge receipt of my email.

I will get back to you all once he has had a chance to get back to me. I have to say, it is nice that people such as Mr Bohm, Earl of Northesk etc. are so engaged with the public on this issue.

Alexander Hanff

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

Completely agree with ya there. Good to know that not everyone has defected over to the dark side - even though they have better cookies ;)

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

I note My MP's name can it be the same person who replied to my Email Thus


ROBER T WILSON MP Reading East


HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON SWIA OAA



Mr Robert xxxxxxx xx xxxxxxx Court Reading RG2 xxx
09 April 2008
Dear Mr Caswell,
Thank you for your letter dated 28th March regarding the security of your web browsing. I presume you are referring to plans to crack down on illegal file sharing.
There is clearly a problem with the illegal downloading of music and films, and we must take a tough stance on piracy. The British Phonographic Industry has estimated that the music industry has lost over £1 billion in 2005 as a result of illegal file¬sharing. The Government has dithered for several years on what action to take to combat this problem. This delay has meant that illegal downloads have increased dramatically to the detriment of our creative industries.
I share your concerns about recent reports suggesting that the Government will introduce legislation to force internet service providers (ISPs) to take action against users accessing pirate material. It is my belief that legislation should only be considered as a last resort. ISPs do need to take action over illegal downloading, but I would like to see them close down offending sites and block access where necessary without legislation compelling them to do so.
As my Conservative colleagues have argued, there are better ways of tackling this problem rather than imposing more legislation on the industry. Conservatives welcome and support the move to give Trading Standards officers the powers to seize pirate and bootleg CDs that breach copyright law, even if they do not bear infringing trademarks following the Gower Review of Intellectual Property, which was published in December 2006.
In addition, as David Cameron has argued, we should consider education policies to raise public awareness of intellectual property rights. In July 2007, he called on the Government to work in partnership with the industry to get the message across that buying pirate CDs and illegally downloading music is wrong and has a serious impact on the creative industries. Part of the challenge we face is that many people simply do not see anything wrong in downloading music or films, and we must therefore change people's mindsets.
My colleagues in the Shadow Culture, Media and Sport team will be scrutinising the Government's proposals in the Creative Industries paper when it is published.



Westminster Secretary: 020 7219 2498


robwilsonmp@parliament.uk

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

Oh really? Just as well I wrote to him then, since he's my MP.

Still waiting for a response.

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

I presume you will be casting your vote the other way then based on his complete incompetence or ability to even read your original email.

And we wonder why the country is in a mess?

Alexander Hanff

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

I wish I had your confidence!

If they dig their heels in, would a judicial review be the most appropriate next step? I guess the other possibility would be something from the EU - but we all know how long that might take.

I would have thought that we should be aiming to get an investigation under way before the BT trials are due to start. Would that then give an opportunity for an injunction suspending the trials until the legality had been established?

If the authorities get a feel for how far this campaign is prepared to go, would it not increase the pressure on them to instigate an investigation?

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

Slightly off topic (well very actually) but I take it you all heard the news of the preliminary judgement from the High Court on unlawful bank charges today?

My Masters fees might have just found a new sponsor ;)

Alexander Hanff

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

Hmmmm....I think this goes some way to removing the 'comfort' part from Kent's 'letter of comfort from the Home Office.' In no way are the HO saying it is legal or not, merely that it has not been tested in a court of law (yet).

I think the HO are back-pedaling a little to distance themselves from the apparent Phorm-friendly stance they previously allowed Phorm to spout about.

Recent days go to show that governmental u-turns are not impossible. Give the HO a little time to breathe and they may well come around to our way of thinking and realise that their real boss is Joe Public and not some shyster out to make a quick buck off the backs of ordinary folk.

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

Well pressure is only increasing from all quarters. What we should all do next is write a letter of complaint to our MPs regarding the Police and Home Office inaction explaining that we are complaining in line with the procedures required leading up to a complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

If I remember correctly, the procedures are to first write to your MP and if your MP is unable to resolve the issue, you can then write to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

A few thousand letters to the PO should be enough to cause sufficient mayhem to maybe get something done. Failing that, Judicial Review would probably be our next course of action.

Incidentally, Kent stated on Tuesday (eventually after lots of prying by the BBC) that the services are going to roll out in the next few weeks. Of course, we already know this to be untrue because BT have not even started their planned trials yet so for the system to be deployed fully in a few weeks would literally be impossible.

Alexander Hanff

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

Or a desperate attempt to get it up and running before it could be stopped.

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

That was exactly my thought!

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

phormukprteam might want to change their user ID?

To: phormukpteam (no 'r')?

Because they are just Public now, no Relations with the public, just Public.

:D:D:D:D:D

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

Just had a second reply from Amazon thye are now going to investigate phorm and what phorm does before replying to me again... I will let you know what happens but have replied thanking them and added in that I had planned to boycot all companies that use the phormadvertising platform. :D

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

Given that Phorm and BT have continually refused, despite my public challenges here an on El Reg, to publish the full legal opinions they claim to have received including the full details of the QC who provided this advice, one has to ask if this "letter of comfort"** was all that they actually had?

So yet again I challenge Phorm to provide the full QC opinion, including date and time of original issue and the details of the QC who provided it. No spin or interpretation needed thank you, just the full QC opinion. There are people here who can and will provide suitable interpretation.

It's not difficult.

The HO had little choice other than to admit that the "letter of comfort" did not qualify as legal opinion given that Nicholas Bohm has already reminded them that the courts decide on what is and isn't legal under the law.

They still have not answered why they have done nothing to investigate the secret trials. Time to write to my MP again...

**It's a bit different to the kind of thing I would regard as a letter of comfort... Something like

"Dear CaptHunter, I'm happy to confirm to you that the story about Sky One remaking Blake's 7 is in fact nothing more than a complete fabrication and we will not, in fact, be going ahead with any such production." would be very comforting right now.

OK, who thought it was going to be something very different? *grin*

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

Well I finally read all of Nicholas Bohm's paper today - The Phorm "Webwise" System - a Legal Analysis.

It's a masterpiece of well phormed understanding!

The only bit I really did not understand (maybe someone can help me here) is in para. 37, "The authorisation of interception is hedged about with safeguards". I really cannot comprehend the meaning of that sentence. Believe me, I tried to today. Is this 'hedged about' meaning 'surrounded by'? Maybe I need a vino and it will become clear!

Hank

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

Letter written to Neil Berkett. Includes Nicholas Bohm's legal analysis and letter to the Home Office...

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

Hedging can have many uses in language but in this case I think it merely states ( not having taken it in context ) that the authorisation is not easy to obtain being protected ( hedged about ) by safeguards.

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

Thanks Panasonic :) - that fits I think.

Email sent to my MP, follow up to letter she has already replied to, link to N Bhhm's paper, Early Day Motion and summary of the latest. Asked if she will sign the EDM and expressed concern about the police/HO/ICO etc

Damn, then I saw Alexander's idea about complaining in line with the procedures required leading up to a complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. It'll save... I'll no doubt be writing another in a week or so!

Hank

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

Had to visit my online banking today so decided to browse the pages I never visit.. :D

Just wonder what sort of mess the Phorm addition to the cookies would do....

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

In case this has not been posted already

http://www.capmarkets.com/ViewFile.a...HRM_230408.pdf

and in particular

"And

taking unnecessary risks on new technology adoption."

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

Here we go damn good stuff

And third, the launch customers – BT, Carphone Warehouse and Virgin Media – have
also undergone extensive trialling of the technology, and none are in the business of
taking unnecessary risks on new technology adoption.

so phorm are admitting themselves that all these companies have done trials
i belive now 95% that i was under some sort of trial, last year.

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

Another quote from the same:

i.e. Phorm know opt in would damage the business model and intend to revert to opt out once the current storm has died down.

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

Hmm full of the usual spin and half-truths. Also little mention of 121media, spyware or rootkits in the CVs (surprise!). Anyone investing their hard-earned on the basis of this deserves all they get. Anyone subscribing to Charles Stanley needs to seriously question if they are getting value for money if this is typical of the quality of their work

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

Well let's see what Neil Berkett has to say about this. Someone's telling porkies somewhere.

Note that this document states that

"This research has not been prepared in accordance with regulatory requirements designed to promote the independence of
investment research."

So it admits (albeit in small print) that it's just a piece of promotional spin garbage.

And also that it quotes the very advice that the Home Office is now standing off from.

Lots of spin but precious little fact. Keep alerting people to the spin-free facts and they will be persuaded that Phorm is something we can all live without.

The sooner BT gets its sorry backside dragged through the courts the better.

What was it Bill Hicks said about people who work in marketing and advertising?

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

Ill take them to court if proved that vm was trialing in a certain peroid during last year as i have grounds to belive such equipment to have caused damage.

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

Can I ask those who are TalkTalk and Virgin Media customers - what attempts have been made to ask awkward detailed questions and get answers (or attributable avoidance) from VM and TalkTalk/Carphone Warehouse management and what responses have you had?

What I've noticed so far, have been some contradictory Virgin Media responses when reassuring statements in individual emails to customers are compared with more Phorm-friendly VM website statements. And that there is no VM logo on Phorm's Webwise site.

I'm also aware of the TalkTalk/Carphone Warehouse commitment to an opt-in solution (and I've quoted that regularly at BT, each time referring to BT as being on the moral low ground compared with CW as regards privacy, or "behind" or a "second class" ISP in terms of privacy compared with CW.)

While BT are the most obviously already in the legal firing line because of their trials, it's important for customers to remind VM and CW managers directly of their legal vulnerability and the fact that their customers do understand the arguments and are not just "uninformed privacy freaks" who can be fobbed off with a bit of Kent Ertugrul spin.

How much is being done to closely and persistently associate the trademarks Virgin Media and Carphone Warehouse/TalkTalk with terms like illegality, criminal, unauthorised interception, privacy invasion, breach of trust, deception, forgery, and fraud in the public mind and in the google database?

BT customers can get emails to managers fairly easily as they have a very accessible standard email address policy and once you know their name you can 99% guess their email address. What's the situation with the potentially criminally liable managers of the other 2 ISP's toying with the idea of allegedly illegal criminal interception of internet traffic?

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

Commitment to an opt-in solution? For how long?

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

I have had no reply to any queries i made to virgin media r.jones

lets have a look at phorms pledge.

The Phorm Proposition
Phorm’s OIX platform promises a revolution in online advertising and privacy. By
guaranteeing the anonymity of the browsing activity of ISPs’ customers (Wrong The cookie linked to the ip can be classed as an identifier), the OIX effectively opens up the entire Internet to advertising.
For the first time, the
entire browsing behaviour of a consumer across the entire Internet can be profiled
– and not just within the limited confines of ad networks (Admission to profiling everything).
Also for the first time,potentially the entire stock of Internet websites becomes available to carry advertising, opening up the ‘long tail’ of hitherto un-monetisable sites (So even non oix sites will carry advertising they never had before and be more obstrusive while maybe cutting out the website owners add income by covering up their sponsors ads.).
The ‘opted
in’ consumer wins out by receiving more relevant advertising, and in the process
benefiting from a better funded Internet (How is scanning webpages i visit,forums i post on or private messages i send bringing me ANY benefit or provide anything relevant).

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

Is this the Charles Stanley document that brettypoos is going on about on iii.co.uk ? Looks like it.

I think this bears some careful reading. It's an interesting mixture of Kent's spin, and some stuff that "may" represent what is "really" being planned/has "really" been done. Some of the phraseology would be very embarrassing and not what I imagine Kent Ertugrul and the ISP partners would like to see in the public realm - the wolf beneath the Phorm grannie mask? "Grandma what good commercial prospects you seem to have!" "All the better to track you with my dear!"

Significant parts of the document are now out of date, it predates the third ICO statement, it predates the latest FIPR paper by Nicholas Bohm, and it predates today's smart "one step backwards" by the Home Office. It is wildly unrealistic about the legality of Phorm.

It also seems to contradict a number of statements from the ISP's about opt-in/opt-out, and about the relative "firmness" of any relevant contracts between them and Phorm.

It also is technically very light, and fails totally to engage with Richard Clayton's analysis of how the system actually works, and where its security weaknesses are - this document is wildly overoptimistic on security of Phorm.

Various parts of the document might well be worth throwing at the ISP's to ask them if various statements in it are true. They may have to contradict the bits they are definitely embarrassed by and that could be interesting!

For example, the assertions that VM and TalkTalk have conducted trials on Phorm/Webwise. Really? How interesting. When? With whose consent? How many customers affected?

Time for bed methinks.

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

I have had two conversations with a contact from Neil Berkett's office - not the customer service people but the CEO's office - as well as previous letters from the VM Group Data Protection Officer, Ian Woodham stating that customers will not be forced to use the [Phorm] system.

The conversations have included the following points: *fires up text editor and file where these notes were typed in*

VM have not signed up with Phorm, they have expressed an interest

VM are still looking into the [Phorm] matter and there is absolutely no foregone conclusion that a Phorm system will be implemented.

VM will also consider any negative effect on their reputation as part of their deliberations.

These points were made to me in conversation on the morning of 8th April.

Additionally I spoke to this contact on 22nd April; he reaffirmed these points and specifically said that the only agreement VM had signed with Phorm was by way of a non-disclosure agreement, that VM would not be looking at any other alternative technologies while this agreement was in force.

I have been assured that Neil Berkett has seen my letter so he is aware that Phorm is an issue.

The letter that Neil Berkett will get on Monday asks directly about any previous testing and points out the continued damage to VM's reputation by its continued association with Phorm.

I've mentioned here the address to write to Neil Berkett and get attention quickly. The more people who write to him (don't bother with customer services, write a concise, professional letter to the CEO) the more he will actually come to realise Phorm is a bad thing.

OK, I've got through with a message but I'm only one voice. Sure I've got a biggish gob and when annoyed can be cutting with words but I'm still just one voice.

Make a difference, write to the CEO and politely ask him the awkward questions about why VM hasn't dropped Phorm yet.

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

Where to start except to say - remind me not to invest on the recommendation of this outfit. The future is bright, the future is Phorm

Assuming of course that the 70% want to "carry advertising messages" and that the big three don't just cut off Phorm's hands when the find them in the cookie jar. I'm already looking for a Apache module that will dump all Phormed requests to a modified 404 page.

Well it's a point of view I suppose.

That will be us then? The ones who looked past the Webwise "safer more relevant Internet experience" drivel and asked the awkward questions.

No, we want to opt out of Phorm - I choose to let Google profile me in return for their search service. The key word here is choice

What is it with these people that they cannot distinguish a compulsory, unavoidable Phorm wire tap from my voluntary use of Google?


Interesting statement.

Again the assumption being that Phorm is free to steal anyone's content straight off the wires and use it to build their business. Content providers may have a different view.

When did this happen?

:cool:

Microsoft and Google in the exchange wire tapping my connection - where do I sign up?

All in all a very interesting read - a couple of points though ..

The assumptions on consumer uptake are based on what exactly? The upper end of 90% seems absurdly optimistic.

Confidence in Phorm's legality and Government backing seem to be equally optimistic.

The report avoids almost completely the issue of content provider co-operation. The view of the "70% long tail" as just an untapped resource ripe for monetisation under our new overlords is a dangerous one. As Kent himself pointed out the net is made up of the big three and a lot of amateurs. Those amateurs cannot be relied upon to tow the line in any situation, especially one where they are coerced.

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

I will let you in to a little secret NTL / Virgin Media have bean doing secret trials on there business customers, I will post the proof as soon as I get it, I am just waiting for NTL to send the letter to my friend, my friend owns his own network in scotland.

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

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

I've seen that webwise.net & a.webwise.net cookies have been stored on my computer. Because of this I came accross a plugin for firefox & installed it so it will block cookies from websites I choose. It's called CS Lite, I also have the Dephormation plugin installed. Blocking the cookies, is that ok to do or blocking them will that mean I'm opting for Phorm? When I checked one of the cookies it had the detail OP_OUT or something along those lines.

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

as i outlined previously the need and requirements to send your Data Protection Act Notices.

here's an interesting Virgin Media DPA Notice post, and in this case (most of you forgot about that PFPODM statute so i thought id remind you ;) )the "the right to prevent Processing For Purposes Of Direct Marketing"

but the exact same approach is used for removal of their rights to process, and/or giving them your explicit instructions on how and when you will allow them to process your data collecting,processing,storing and Exporting outside the UK etc.

its your data, and you tell them what they can or cant do with it, remember.

i post it here for clarity and as a letter template reference later, but go over there and also contribute to the slow CAG phorm thread, as it seems the CAG ISP section is in need of a massive revitalisation of new ISP consumer blood ;)

and i wont re-enclose the original quotes but rather use "---" so as to make it easyer to include if you want to, in any reply's
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ml#post1490209
"
djdave
Gold Account Customer
Re: Phorm..... Here's my experience with Virgin Media so far.

I wrote to them a few weeks ago with this letter:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------start
Quote:
The Data Controller
Virgin Media
PO Box 333,
Matrix Court,
Swansea.
SA7 9ZJ

19 March 2008

Dear Sir / Madam,

Formal notice under Section 11 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (the right to prevent processing for purposes of direct marketing)

Virgin Account number: xxxxxxxxx

Please take note that I do not give my consent for Virgin Media to share any of my data (including but not limited to browsing habits, keywords, search terms) with external advertisers, including but not limited to Phorm / Webwise.

This applies even if such data is considered to be Non-Personally Identifiable Information, anonymous or untraceable.

I am aware that the proposed Phorm service will enable me to opt-out using cookies on my PC, but take note that I do not consent for any of my data to be passed to Phorm or any external advertiser irrespective of cookies or any other technology.

You will be aware that the Home Office recently published a report which concluded that “targeted online advertising services should be provided with the explicit consent of ISPs' users”. My consent will not be forthcoming.

I now expect your assurance, in writing, that you will put measures in place to comply with this notice. Specifically I require your confirmation that I will not need to take any measures on my PC or router to prevent my data being passed to Phorm or any third-party advertiser.

You will be aware that s11 Data Protection Act 1998 provides that where a Data Controller has failed to act on such a Notice within a reasonable period, a court may order the Controller to take such steps as the court sees fit to comply.

I would consider 28 days to be a “reasonable period” for you to comply.
I appreciate your due diligence on this matter.

Yours faithfully,
-----------------------------------------------------------end

The response I received (from Customer Concern, not the Data Controller) was basically "Webwise will be good for you, protecting you from phishing and those nasty irrelevant adverts. Ignore the anti-Phorm propoganda in the media, you can trust us. We know what's best.". Not in those exact words, you understand!

So I sent them this:

---------------------------------------------------------start
Quote:
Pete Moore
Customer Concern
Virgin Media
Matrix Court
Llansamlet
SA7 9BB


3 April 2008

Dear Sir,

Virgin Account number: xxxxxxx
Your reference: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I am in receipt of your letter of 26th March which raises some fresh concerns, not the least of which is your inability to distinguish between my forename and surname.

I find myself disappointed that you have chosen to treat my letter as a simple complaint, rather than as a statutory notice under Section 11 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (Data Protection Act) as I believe I made clear in the heading of my letter.

You will surely be aware that Virgin Media has a statutory duty under the Data Protection Act to implement a request for personal data not to be used for the purposes of direct marketing, and your failure thus far to act on my request leaves you open to legal and regulatory action.

I trust that you will now ensure that a copy of my original letter is passed to your Data Controller for his immediate attention.

Furthermore, I am saddened to find that Virgin Media has apparently adopted the same “we know what’s good for you” stance as Phorm themselves. I am perfectly well aware of how the system works without your patronising effort to explain it.

The “Webwise” system is of absolutely no value or interest to me, as my browser already incorporates an anti-phishing system- although I choose not to use it. I also block the vast majority of advertisements whether relevant or otherwise, and in any case would not click on any such adverts.

You claim that “a lot of what is being touted [about Phorm] is ill-informed”. While I am sure there has been some degree of speculation about the system in certain elements of the media, my opinion has been formed from reading transcripts of interviews with Kent Ertegrul, the CEO of Phorm itself.

For the avoidance of doubt I would ask you one simple yes-or-no question as follows:

If I choose not to participate in this “service”, will Virgin Media take permanent steps to ensure that none of my data, internet traffic or browsing patterns will be passed to Phorm or any other third party irrespective of any settings or cookies on my computer(s) and router?

I have grave concerns that should you do so without my express consent you would be in breach of both the Data Protection Act 1998 and Section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

You should be aware that should Virgin Media not now act to address my concerns I shall report the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office, as well as bringing it to the attention of local and national media and to my local Member of Parliament.

Needless to say I would also terminate my contract with Virgin Media and move my internet and telephone services to a company which has undertaken not to use this “service”.

I trust that you will now give due diligence to this matter, and I look forward to your response.

Yours faithfully,
--------------------------------------------------------------end

Again I've received a reply apologising for any concerns I might have but assuring me that Webwise is wonderful and that when the time comes for Phorm to go live it'll be made clear - and I'll have the opportunity to opt out.

THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

As I understand it, if I opt out all that will happen is I won't see the ads - my traffic will still be routed via Webwise. Well I use IE7Pro and don't see adverts anyway! I do not want my data to be passed to Phorm, whether anonymised or not. I believe that to do so against my express wishes would be unlawful.

Virgin are treading a dangerous path legally, by failing to pass a valid Statutory Notice to their data controller. I'm about to pass copies of my correspondence to the Information Commissioner's Office, and I'll keep you posted.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/04/9.gif
"

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

Don't forget that the Dephormation addon may be responsible for those cookies from a.webwise.net- it works by setting an opt-out cookie. Try disabling it and then deleting the cookies. They shouldn't come back.

You can run dephormation addon while at the same time blocking the relevant cookies via Firefox privacy tab. Dephormation will then warn you about Phorm related sites but it will NOT be able to set an opt-out cookie for you.

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

It seems to me that as an organisation, Virgin Media do not appear to know what they have got themselves into. Popper, can I use your Notice in the sample letters page I'm building on http://www.inphormationdesk.org?

On a related matter, I've just received new Ts&Cs from them with a covering letter telling me that I "... recently entered into a consumer agreement with Virgin Media ...", which of course I didn't: I last entered into a consumer agreement with one of their predecessors some six years ago.

I assume this is just so that they can alter charges for the service, but I wonder if it's also an attempt to keep unwilling Phorm users subscribed for the full twelve months? Given I have not signed anything, if Virgin Media were to implement Phorm and I were to leave them as a result, at the minimum it would be arguable in court.

I note Paragraph B1(i) in the terms: "With your permission, we may monitor email and internet communications, including without limitation, any content or material transmitted over the service".

1. Does anyone know if this is new and put in place for Phorm?

2. "Any content or material" includes https. I will email the Consumers Association to ask what kind of consumer protection this offers.

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

it's not my notice , its djdave 's but thats why it was put there for everyones use as a guide or template, so i dont see why not.

---------- Post added at 08:45 ---------- Previous post was at 08:30 ----------


as in a real paper Consumer T&C contract in your hand?.....

dont assume anything about just future increases in price etc, if its anything like the current online version , its full of holes and looks like it was written or rather cut and pasted by an 6th form student (no offense to 6th form students OC).

they cant force you to sign it OC, and its werth giving it some serious thought BEFORE YOU DO.

your 6 years ago consumer T&C contract is the the original one you signed when the salesman sold it to you, and that has an effect, but i didnt look up exactly how that effects the new T&Cs they might include over time, i seem to remember no new ones are valid if there exists a written one before that date but you might have to look that up for the official court view.

BUT, if they require from now on a fully signed consumer T&C contract, to try the we have a paper signed contract bla bla.

thats also a very good thing in the future (keep your copy safe to reproduce in SC later), see, the fact is if you sign it and they keep supplying the service then you potentially have them cold...:angel:

the thing with (consumer) contracts is..., you as the other party can scrub out any and all clauses you do not agree with,and simply initial them to make them void without need to involve the small claims court process later etc.

and infact you can include your own clauses, the second they activate the new contract and supply the services they too are bound by this new contract and all the bits you scrubed out or amended.....;)

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

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo..._position.html

More from Charles Arthur, interestingly, following on from yesterday's deafening silence from BT, Phorm had this to say w/r/t the FIPR documents.

"FIPR is abusing its influence and promoting its own agenda by encouraging a frivolous debate about the legality of a legitimate e-commerce business. Internet users would be better served if FIPR focused on the benefits of the online technologies available today rather than undermine the online privacy debate and block technological progress. That would help people to make valid informed choices about the services they want to use."

So, not a refutation of the points, in any way, but straight on to the ad-hominem attacks. Rattled or what ?

And is it even possible to have a "frivolous debate about the legality of" something ?

Sounds like an epic fail to me. I don't think any decent PR would have let that statement pass, either, to combative, so perhaps Phorm have ditched their flying PR monkeys.

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

Very good site there! I'll certainly be bookmarking that and recommending it over on BT Beta forums. Well done! I especially liked the list of Questions for BT. Very well chosen, and I don't think you will be getting answers on any of them.

With regard to those T&C and "new agreement" claims - BT constantly update their T&C's, usually very quietly, but a new contract is only initiated when we sign up for some new service and they are always up-front about the difference between being "out of contract" and in a fixed contract.

The real issue for the customer to remember, is that it doesn't really matter what the ISP's put in their T&Cs. If the terms and conditions are held to be unfair, or relate to what turn out to be illegal acts, they are unenforceable and then the whole contract becomes void.

If there is a unilateral change to the T&Cs while you are "bound" in a contract term, say having signed up to a new 12month or 18 month agreement, and the unilateral changes the ISP announces and imposes on you, are to your material disadvantage, even if they ARE legal, and even if they ARE fair, you are not bound to the changed contract and can leave without penalty.

---------- Post added at 09:17 ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 ----------

I think we should be encouraging Kent Ertugrul to say as much as possible, preferably live. He's turning into a great asset for the anti-Phorm/Webwise cause. I want to see more of this guy!

I've popped a comment on the Guardian blog.

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

Virgin needs to move quickly to refute the claims in the Charles Stanley document that it was involved in secret trials with Phorm. Otherwise it is a clear signal that its recent denials are false, and it too needs to be investigated as per BT.

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

Judging from Phorms activities lately they seem very rattled. First the ad hominem attacks on Alexander by Kent at the Click interview. Now this latest outburst against the FIPR. Kent really does have an amazing talent and must be incredibly nimble to manage to regularly keep putting his foot in his mouth.

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

After talking to my mother today I was shocked and somewhat pleased to find out she still has her shares in BT...

She doesn't go to any AGMs as in her 80s this is difficult and all her votes have been cast by the chair ( to his gains no doubt) is it legal for me to attend the AGM as her representative this way taking her votes from the chair?
Can I ask awkward questions at the AGM?

Shame about not having any VM shares..

---------- Post added at 09:52 ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 ----------

Also if BT are found guilty of illegally wiretapping the customers what effect will this have on shareholders who will be the ones by gripped by the round balls BT staff or shareholders?

If this is ok for me to attend I would need some help on really awkward questions to ask?

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

You will need a letter of authority to act as her proxy in the meeting. Companies usually distribute a pro-forma LOA for people in similar situations to use.

The shareholders will not be liable in any court action that is made against BT. The company staff and executive carry the legal risks associated with their actions. The share holders provide the capital that form the base of BT.

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

So it wil be legal for me to have some fun at BT's expense so to speak sure any shareholders asking questions about legality on phorm has to be answerd.

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

Hi this link was in my in box this morn.>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/register/20...l-d1d76f9.html << what amazed me are the number of stars its got!

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

It's got a few more now! I have several sub accounts.
Just popping over to BT Beta Forums to canvas a few more.

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

I've now added sample letters and notices at http://www.inphormationdesk.org/sampleletters.htm
Thanks to all contributors.

Everyone, please provide any feedback or additional contributions!

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

Both the Stanley document and straight questions about any testing are in the letter that's gone out to Neil Berkett.

And I've left a suitable response to Phorm in the Guardian blog.

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

If you can bear to plod thru the Virgin.feedback newsgroup a Virgin senior tech claims that the kit was trialled in their lab but never on the live network or with live data. I'm sure he believes what he says, but as is pointed out, other parts of the VM site continue to be a phorm spin-a-thon and there has been no public challenge to assertions in the CS paper, or to others that Phorm used data from VM trials to pre-populate OIX.

---------- Post added at 11:22 ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 ----------

I wonder if the 'exclusive sites' described in this article realise how exclusive they won't be if phorm goes ahead? http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...cle3671900.ece

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

On a tangent, how come Sky haven't waded in with a "phorm free" sales campaign? Not like them to miss a trick.

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

maybe because they are operating their own 'what are you watching' technology on Sky+ ?

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

Think you will find they are being crafty if the main three succeed then sky will join in the gravy boat..

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

You can bet your life that sky will dive in the trough quckly enough if bt & vm get the greenlight.