Quote:
Originally Posted by dav
Do you not think it is ironic that you feel the need to make such a statement?
Do you feel you involvement with Phorm has had a negative impact on your reputation in privacy circles?
After all, while your assessment of the system may be perfectly correct and it may well represent an advance in online privacy, it seems as if Phorm have been caught wrong-footed by the backlash from the general public's natural distrust of anything that tries to pigeon-hole and categorise them in order to make money off their data while giving nothing in return. If it turns out that it complies with the letter of the law, it certainly does not reflect the spirit of it, nor do ethical considerations come into it.
Unfortunately, it looks as if you have been put in a position where you have had to defend and explain yourself due to some over-zealous PR from Phorm and the perception has (wrongly, I think) been that you have been in cahoots with them all along. Why would Phorm pay for and advertise a PIA that they know would condemn their system?
I sympathise with your position (not that that means anything), but it does seem as if you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
|
You make some very interesting observations. If I can put my Privacy International hat on for a minute, those thoughts are foremost in our minds.
Imagine our position. We're the only truly global privacy watchdog and we deal at any one time with perhaps fifty major privacy issues affecting up to a hundred countries. After twenty years of fighting endless battles we've concluded that the only way through this planet-wide quagmire is to push across the spectrum for transparency and disclosure. That's why the Phorm case is so important.
Right at the moment, for example, we're in combat with an increasingly secret and unaccountable EU regime, an almost totally unaccountable and invisible US regime and an increasingly opaque Westminster regime. There are more covert agreements between governments than you could ever imagine, backed by IT deals that go to the heart of personal privacy at the deepest levels. Commercial secrecy has crippled any hope of public input.
After the Phorm process you now know the nature and extent of your target. That's a healthy start. For us, as privacy advocates, the real challenge is achieving that level of disclosure across the board - the banks, governments, security agencies, border services, data miners and identity providers.
What we learn through the Phorm process will be important to addressing that larger picture.