View Single Post
Old 24-04-2008, 09:50   #4654
Rchivist
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 831
Rchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of QuadsRchivist has a fine set of Quads
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

I have sent the following off to my list of BT managers, and posted also on the BT Beta forum Webwise discussion thread.

Start...
BT have publicly stated their confidence on air, and in print, that the Phorm/Webwise system is legal.
They have equally clearly indicated that in their opinion the secret, initially denied, trials of 2006 and 2007 were legal.

In the light of the latest FIPR thinking on Phorm/Webwise http://www.fipr.org/080423phormlegal.pdf which was published yesterday:

Is Phorm/Webwise legal under RIPA 2000?
Is Phorm/Webwise legal under DPA 1998?
Is Phorm/Webwise legal under Fraud Act 2006?
Is Phorm/Webwise exposing ISP's and their users to civil action when they visit websites such as that operated by the Bank of England?

If BT are confident that the answer to the above four questions is still an unequivocal YES, could we please have a firm starting date for the trials of Webwise that were due in mid-March please? The latest prediction I heard was late April, and it's late April now.

Just to focus the mind - here is the relevant extract of the summary paragraph 4, on the first page of the [latest legal analysis from FIPR (Nicholas Bohm)
http://www.fipr.org/080423phormlegal.pdf

"This paper concludes that deployment by an ISP of the Phorm architecture will
involve the following illegalities (for which ISPs will be primarily liable and for
which Phorm Inc will be liable as an inciter):
• interception of communications, an offence contrary to section 1 of the
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
• fraud, an offence contrary to section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006
• unlawful processing of sensitive personal data, contrary to the Data
Protection Act 1998
• risks of committing civil wrongs actionable at the suit of website owners
such as the Bank of England."

If we do not get a firm starting date for the trials, can we assume that their is doubt in the minds of BT about the legality of Phorm/Webwise?

If there is no doubt, then why the continual slippage in that trial starting date?

Or can BT simply repeat the public statements about the legality of Phorm?

You will appreciate that in the light of FIPR's report it is no longer simply a matter of our opinions about what we do and don't like. As BT customers, opted in or opted out, we are alarmed at the prospect of being prosecuted, should BT implement this reputedly illegal technology. With 75% of the country's ISP customers potentially affected this is an extremely serious matter.

Also posted on the only current Webwise discussion thread on BT Beta forums, the Q&A thread having been summarily closed down some weeks ago, also posted on Cableforum discussion forum on the same topic.

Please note that I would like to publish any replies to this email on those forums, removing names if requested.
Finish...

I'll come back with any replies I get.
Rchivist is offline