Quote:
Originally Posted by dav
What really gets my goat is the whole interception and Orwellian approach to the data harvesting and profiling that goes on, even if you maintain your opt-out cookie. I don't want my browsing scrutinised, boiled down and pigeon-holed.
|
Me too!
/aol
And of course, that Phorm and VM may decide next year to use more of my personal browsing data for a different revenue-raising project. I'd imagine that the RIAA-types would pay to identify frequent visitors to bittorrent sites...
For me it's the principle of maintaining control of private data.
The other major means of communication (snail mail, telephone, etc) are protected to the extent that this wouldn't be permitted -- why on earth should we allow them to profit from our private data because it's online?
---------- Post added at 16:47 ---------- Previous post was at 16:37 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by popper
i suspect in (a small?)part , TT/CPW didnt like the thought of masses of paying users taking control of how their personal data can be explicity used by sending a simple 'DPA notice'.
after all, if you dont bother to type one up, and send it registered post, outlining your instructions, then the ISPs generic T&C concent part, can perhaps give them lots of options... to abuse said concent.
|
Has anybody heard of a response from VM to one of those DPA s11 letters yet?