Thread: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
View Single Post
Old 21-04-2008, 23:29   #4344
AlexanderHanff
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,028
AlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful oneAlexanderHanff is the helpful one
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMHarman View Post
I've said this a number of times. They probably are compliant with DPA, it is RIPA and the rest of the mining process to come up with the data they keep that is the problem. Phorm consistently spins back to what they keep, not how they obtain it to try to obfuscate the issue.
Actually I don't believe they are compliant with DPA as DPA clearly refers to making operations on data as a definition of processing. The very act of making operations via DPI to detect what the data is (opt in cookie, opt out cookie, is the page blacklisted etc etc etc > profiler > channel server) these are -all- operations so I still firmly believe the system with it's current model breaches DPA.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 22:29 ---------- Previous post was at 22:06 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Florence View Post
So on a legal side if a customer of VM was phormed (with or without informed consent) visited those sites and Phorm categorised the page logged and profiled the customer. This is where Pandora’s Box comes in as the person with or without Knowledge has just broken the rule on Amazon and now opened themselves up for possible prosecution.

I think I am becoming more legal minded in my thinking I need help..

Maybe Alexander could tell me if I am right or wrong the person that would be prosecuted would be the customer not the Phorm management in the case like Amazon?
I raised the issue of customer complicity some time ago now in the early days of the scandal. Yes I believe still that if a customer "Opts In" and then initiates a connection to a web site with explicit terms denying consent to intercept, process etc. then there is a serious concern that they could be seen as complicit and could face criminal action under RIPA.

Alexander Hanff
AlexanderHanff is offline