Cable Forum - View Single Post - Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

Rchivist · 25-04-2008, 00:27

Can I ask those who are TalkTalk and Virgin Media customers - what attempts have been made to ask awkward detailed questions and get answers (or attributable avoidance) from VM and TalkTalk/Carphone Warehouse management and what responses have you had?

What I've noticed so far, have been some contradictory Virgin Media responses when reassuring statements in individual emails to customers are compared with more Phorm-friendly VM website statements. And that there is no VM logo on Phorm's Webwise site.

I'm also aware of the TalkTalk/Carphone Warehouse commitment to an opt-in solution (and I've quoted that regularly at BT, each time referring to BT as being on the moral low ground compared with CW as regards privacy, or "behind" or a "second class" ISP in terms of privacy compared with CW.)

While BT are the most obviously already in the legal firing line because of their trials, it's important for customers to remind VM and CW managers directly of their legal vulnerability and the fact that their customers do understand the arguments and are not just "uninformed privacy freaks" who can be fobbed off with a bit of Kent Ertugrul spin.

How much is being done to closely and persistently associate the trademarks Virgin Media and Carphone Warehouse/TalkTalk with terms like illegality, criminal, unauthorised interception, privacy invasion, breach of trust, deception, forgery, and fraud in the public mind and in the google database?

BT customers can get emails to managers fairly easily as they have a very accessible standard email address policy and once you know their name you can 99% guess their email address. What's the situation with the potentially criminally liable managers of the other 2 ISP's toying with the idea of allegedly illegal criminal interception of internet traffic?

25-04-2008, 00:27	#4772
Rchivist Inactive Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 831	Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] Can I ask those who are TalkTalk and Virgin Media customers - what attempts have been made to ask awkward detailed questions and get answers (or attributable avoidance) from VM and TalkTalk/Carphone Warehouse management and what responses have you had? What I've noticed so far, have been some contradictory Virgin Media responses when reassuring statements in individual emails to customers are compared with more Phorm-friendly VM website statements. And that there is no VM logo on Phorm's Webwise site. I'm also aware of the TalkTalk/Carphone Warehouse commitment to an opt-in solution (and I've quoted that regularly at BT, each time referring to BT as being on the moral low ground compared with CW as regards privacy, or "behind" or a "second class" ISP in terms of privacy compared with CW.) While BT are the most obviously already in the legal firing line because of their trials, it's important for customers to remind VM and CW managers directly of their legal vulnerability and the fact that their customers do understand the arguments and are not just "uninformed privacy freaks" who can be fobbed off with a bit of Kent Ertugrul spin. How much is being done to closely and persistently associate the trademarks Virgin Media and Carphone Warehouse/TalkTalk with terms like illegality, criminal, unauthorised interception, privacy invasion, breach of trust, deception, forgery, and fraud in the public mind and in the google database? BT customers can get emails to managers fairly easily as they have a very accessible standard email address policy and once you know their name you can 99% guess their email address. What's the situation with the potentially criminally liable managers of the other 2 ISP's toying with the idea of allegedly illegal criminal interception of internet traffic?