[Traduk]

I see that in the BBC report, Kent Ertegrul is confused over why the detractors are concerned about opt-in or opt-out and he finds our lack of understanding of the clear choices a bit bizarre. IMO the answer is crystal clear and that is that if the ISP's give a 100% certainty that an opt-out has absolutely nothing to do with any equipment associated with Phorm or its associates whether by pass through, mirroring or any other method then proceed and prosper or fail on merit.

"Having advertising behind it allows for better cheaper broadband" he supposedly said. That might sway a few wavering detractors so expand that comment from the world of maybies and get the ISP's to flesh out exact proposals of how they will deliver these improvements in both performance and cost reductions.

The spin surrounding this debacle takes reading to believe. The BT trialists are all Opt-in by virtue of the fact they have responded to or will respond to invitations. Volunteers are always opt-in and I bet there are huge numbers of people salivating at the chance to get in on the trial but they will have to sign up to as yet unfinished T&C's. I bet they try secrecy as a condition but for a company that doesn't respect privacy forget it, as it will be in the public domain within hours.