|
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
I would agree that most web users are likely to roll their eyes at techy or legal arguements regarding what Phorm intend to do but there are simplistic ways of making the point.
A lot of people, especially the younger amongst users value their privacy and would react positively if they were told that the system is designed to "look over their shoulders" and "spy" on what they do and then "profile" them and feed back against that profile adverts determined by analysis. Tell the average teenager that their parents (assuming same access group and rights) can see what advert profiles have been generated by their offspring by virtue of delivery and a major driving force behind technology is going to become extremely anti spying in any Phorm. I have not posted on this issue for quite a while because the spin on words from Phorm and their PR people is repetitive and boring. The rubbish about no retention of data is inconsequential because what has been retained is an analysed profile from the data viewed. What they have is only of value when married up with their anonymous acronym but as the acronym and the user's IP can be married up by accident or intent then they have spied to obtain and retain a profile on a user. Indeed they may not have retention of the original data beyond the time taken for analysis but the product of that data is retained for the system to work. Does anybody have PingPlotter traces saved from between the national outage on Dec 21st 2007 and the commencement of this thread. I had a lot of speed and surfing problems during that period and magically speed has increased back to very pleasing levels since this thread gained legs. I wish I had saved the pingplotter traces from that time because what drove me to use OpenDns, Treewalker, and Bind in a vain attempt to get reasonable DNS resolutions has long gone. |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html...ble/terms.html that whole section wants throwing out an re-writing, whoever was responsable wants the sack...... theres no way they can enforce much of the little iv read so far, hell even a small error would wipe out the whole clause as invalid, im to tired and not in the mood right now to take it in and comment on it more than that. ---------- Post added at 02:49 ---------- Previous post was at 02:41 ---------- my god... Virgin TV
|
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
That pay-per-view clause made me choke on my chicken pie. Have they never heard of the Trade Descriptions Act? "What does the Trade Descriptions Act require? Any descriptions of goods and services, given by a person acting in the course of a trade or business, should be accurate and not misleading." Since you purchase the pay-per-view directly from the scheduler (at least you do on Sky I presume it is the same for Virgin) then clearly if the scheduler is wrong they are liable under the Trade Descriptions Act and no matter what they put in their terms to the contrary they cannot escape this liability. Bunch of bloody muppets. Alexander Hanff |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
yeap, thats how you do it on VM too.
btw, the notice is still reasonably intact, they skip over or YOU bit nicely by implying its only payments that matter about Notices, and still no re-inclusion of 'electronic' Notice allowed as yet, so no popup Notices for Virgin Media to get Explicit consent. totally implyed only 'ordinary post' is valid, not 'registered post',clever T&C writer ;) hmm two working days for fax, not so sure about that one.... P Notices Any notices we, Virgin Media Payments or you give to each other must be in writing and be delivered by hand, or sent by fax or ordinary post, to you at your home or to us or Virgin Media Payments at the address set out in your Welcome Pack. Any notice period will start from the day on which the notice is delivered if it is sent by hand, from two working days after the date it was posted, if sent by ordinary post, or from the date of successful transmission if it is sent by fax. |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
These same people find out what the "deal-io" is later when they want to buy a house and find that no-one will give them a mortgage or insurance because they used the term "cancer" too frequently in their profile. When they finally feel the pinch they find they are a protest group of one and nobody cares. Lets get this straight, ultimately I want to target my "Ferrari" ads to people who are "in the market" and can afford one. The downside of this is system is that I also don't want to offer anything at all to people who search <insert illness/non commercial proposition here>. That's the reality of targeted marketing. If the majority population of the UK don't care that they are being wire-tapped and their Government or "media" say it's OK then why shouldn't I buy shares in Phorm? As things are, I might well make enough money to get out of this *****ing country and leave our "fat lazy *******s behind you drinking whiskey, smoking dope and plucking out belly button fluff" to their own devices - what else do they deserve? Certainly not me up at this time of night trying to defend them. |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
G opinions, not mine.86. In the course of the meeting Phorm made a number of statements and claims about their system. I include them in this section for completeness. Please note that these are Phorm's " (h) Phorm and their partner ISPs approached the Home Office to seek a letter of comfort that their system did not perform illegal "interception", within the meaning of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The document that resulted was recently published by the Home Office. (i) Phorm have also obtained a QC's opinion on whether they are performing illegal interception. I asked if anyone had ever told them their systems would be illegal to operate and if they had subsequently modifyed them, and was told that, "we didn't get any opinions that it was illegal". " it might be nice if PRPhorm etal were to give us the name and business location of this "A QC", so go on then PhormPRteam, tell us please.... they did mean 'Queens Council' Of Course, and not some 'Quality Control' down the local whatever shop didnt they. purely for 3rd party verification of the facts as layed out by your employers OC... and what exactly does 'a letter of comfort' mean in legal terms or standing? "we didn't get any opinions that it was illegal" as in, we didnt ask for any? or perhaps selective hearing problems were effecting you that day! |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 139 is it that you dont spend any real time posting on message boards or by extension, much time online interacting, but perhaps you online game a lot?, and so cant see that interactive side? you say you are trying to look at all sides of this whole interactive and inter-related picture, did you ask yourself the question, do i really know the whole picture or anything aproaching that? why do you charactorise this thread and the comments in it as a 'Knee-jerk' reaction ? are you making the assumption that noones ever thought about the implications of loosing freedoms in whatever form before this ISP/Phorm business aired ? i realise for you,if infact you dont interact, spend much time online as yet, or dont understand nor care about the powerful tech involved, it might seem as a mear curiosity, almost nothing to worry about. thats its power, this centralised core DPI kit has such possibilitys for the Bad in the wrong hands, and yet its virtually invisible, and werse, its can be remotely re-programed on the fly so you might never see the bad until its to late... is it also to be assumed you dont as yet buy goods services or bank on the internet and so again, you dont see the danger involved there ? never the less, you can see the finantial gain motive and probability that criminal gangs all over the web are looking forward to haveing a collective Phorm network to potentially tap into ,dont you? i cant find the URL right now,found it... http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...er-crime-chart " UK rises to number two in cyber-crime chart After the US By Stewart Meagher: Friday, 04 April 2008, 1:38 PM " but its been reported yesterday that the UK has the worlds second largest criminal online activity after the No.1 US , so you can be sure if theres an ISP/Phorm 0day DPI loophole, it will be found and used. are you trying to tell us your of the 'im alright jack' school of thought ? that being the case , how long before your not alright if your libertys and privacy are striped away right under your nose. as another side of this multi sided thing, id like to just point to this central Government databases URL that points out yet another potential abuse of a computerised system that was unintended and unautherised. http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2008/02/go...cent-have.html |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
OK I have updated the article again, you can find it here: http://www.paladine.org.uk/phorm_paper.pdf
I have now completed the first draft of the sections pertaining to RIPA, Privacy and Electronic Communications (European Directive) Regulations 2003 and Computer Misuse Act 1990 (Scotland). I will be looking at Trespass to Chattels later today and then covering other aspects of the issue. As always, feedback welcomed. I think I fixed the words with Americanised "ise" (ize) but let me know if you find any I missed (other than in quotes obviously). Alexander Hanff |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
quick thought , i think it needs a short laymans overview of what PAEC is ment to protect.
im pritty sure iv read but cant remember were, Phorm are using that 2a and especially 2B as their grounds to justify several things, so perhaps that needs more thought around that, not that iv read the section yet, i need coffe................ whats your Trespass to Chattels external reference alexander i cant find it? and iv only ever read about that once many moons ago now, need to read up. |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
Alexander Hanff |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
ohh yeah , i forgot doh ;)
|
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
There is no reference to Trespass to Chattels in the document yet as I have not yet written that part, but you can find info here:
http://search.opsi.gov.uk/search?q=c...phore&oe=UTF-8 ---------- Post added at 07:40 ---------- Previous post was at 07:36 ---------- My basic argument of trespass to chattels will be based around the javascript injection in the trials. It can (and has been argued in the past) be deemed that running software on a computer without the consent of the owner is trespass to chattels under Torts Act (Interference with Goods). ---------- Post added at 08:08 ---------- Previous post was at 07:40 ---------- Trespass to Chattels is useful because under the UK version of the Computer Misuse Act it is very difficult to "prove" intent. However, because Interference with Goods is covered under tort law there is no requirement to show intent. The mere fact that they interfered with your private property without your consent should be a strong enough argument. Obviously by inserting javascript (which is a program albeit a small program) they have forced your computer to run a 3rd party program without your permission and thus have interfered. Plaintiffs can seek remunerative relief for any damages incurred as a result of the trespass. Damages are not limited to the literalsense of damaging your goods, damages include the cost of any time you had to spend resolving the issue, psychological damages (stress etc.) and anything else which happened as a direct result of the trespass. At least one victim of the trials is reported to have bought a new computer to try and fix the problem, this would be an applicable damage too. |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
i remember now, The doctrine of trespass to chattels states that one may not use the property of another in such a way as to harm that property or interfere with the owners' use and enjoyment of it.
---------- Post added at 09:08 ---------- Previous post was at 08:11 ---------- you know, theres almost nothing on Torts online, its all in paper books costing an arm and leg ........ glad the case is useful, need more coffee......... |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
Alexander Hanff |
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
im not haveing any luck with Uk case law this morning, sorry about that..
i did find a funny potential for the original chattels though, ;) "NB. It can be more expedient and cost-effective for the court rather than a receiver to realise certain chattels or cash." i dont think you really could, but the implication being, you (such as the above guy that had to get a new computer) take this to court,win and get the judge to 'realise certain chattels' as your compensation award , that being the offending Phorm DPI kit ;) ,end everyones misery for the time it takes to replace it with a new one LOL. got to get off now, BBL |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:38. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.