Quote:
Originally Posted by warescouse
Why don't we all send registered letters to VM stating that under section 11 of the Data protection act blah blah blah we don't want our data going to 3rd parties etc (Phorm/webwise).
If we also edit out host files to resolve all the webwise/phorm domains to localhost and suddenly our broadband stops working. Have we not got a cut and dry case against VM under the data protection act if they thrust Phorm/webwise upon us and our broadband stops working?
They must be disregarding our legal request!
Any comments?
|
Although you should already have sent a notice under DPA to Virgin I don't think it will matter much in this case.
DPA deals only with personally identifiable data and it is quite possible that this is probably on area that webwise will actually be able to get around however immoral. The problem with the DPA is currently the law and what is recognised as PID in this country. We should send those letters just so they know we are discontent but the area we need to keep up the pressure in is the interception of communications and computer misuse and fraud because there is not a hope in hell that webwise can get around that in it's current proposed rollout.
Regarding the Znet article. I was annoyed reading that Phorm now say that an opt in method was always in their plans and how they plan to inform people with a webpage ( just that would **** me off in the same manner that popups do ) giving the user freedom of choice. This is not informed opt in. This is opt-out by cookie. at the point of service. This interrupts my service and causes my internet experience to change for the worse.
They plan to offer you an informed choice, but for the average user the information will not be along the lines of the truth behind the service, a truth we all know and understand here but an obfuscation of the information along the lines of.
"dear user, we are about to invite you to use our free service that will protect you from identity theft and reduce all those annoying adverts which currently you have no interest in".
This will seem quite attractive, especially to the less tech savvy who might say yes to the option.
However true information along the lines of
"from this point on we will be monitoring all of your browsing habits and profiling the places you visit so that we can use this information to serve you adverts from out partners in OIX. We also are adding a phishing filter to this service but as a user of Firefox, IE7, Opera, Norton and many other products you are already protected up to and beyond the measures we are tagging on to our targeted advertising service".
They will be relying on clever wording and manipulation of fact to mislead Joe public into thinking they are getting better protection and less adverts for nothing other than a click in the 'yes' box.
This is where we need to educate people so that if it ever does get off the ground ( this is the fastest growing business sector in the world, we can't avoid it, on;y see to it that we have the choice to be apart from it by use of legislation ) that the general public is fully aware of the true nature of the business and the actual lack of benefit to the user if not the likely detriment.
edit: sorry moderators for the stars, I was in full flow. It was however a rather innocuous swear word and nothing foul and or abusive.