Quote:
|
The Charles Stanley report on Phorm states, “our Base Case assumption has the UK going fully commercial during Q3/08; …France in Q1/10; Germany in Q2/10, and Italy and Spain in Q3/10 and Q4/10.”
|
The whole report was filled with wild optimism from start to finish but you really had to wonder about the international 'assumptions'. "France in Q1/10" anyone told the French yet?? 'Non' is a phrase that comes to mind. German high courts may also have something to say about mass wire-tapping. Lets not forget this recent gem from The Supreme Court of the state of New Jersey...
Quote:
|
Chief Justice Rabner said: "Individuals need an ISP address in order to access the internet. However, when users surf the web from the privacy of their homes, they have reason to expect that their actions are confidential.
|
So that will be a big "HELL NO" from New Jersey at least.
Considering they are incorporated in Delaware the US should have been their 'test bed'. The way Phorm views the UK is obvious - the easy target. The country that tops the league in blind acceptance of privacy invasion. What's one more? Where exactly will they go next if they can't get their intrusive scumware accepted - even in the UK? Talk about crawling before you walk.
Just as an aside - There are lot's of good reasons why companies like Google should oppose Phorm but for the moment they should stay away. If Phorm can turn this into some "David and Goliath" commercial confrontation they will. Let Google et al get involved in the extremely unlikely event that BTPhorm goes into production.