Quote:
Originally Posted by Kursk
I don't think we need a PIA and we certainly wouldn't need to plagiarise from the meaningless. There's no need to apply a legitimate process to an illegal concept imho. My prediction for 80/20's PIA is that it will never see the light of day or will be covered in whitewash. At least it wastes some of Phorm's money but I suppose buying in a potential opponent was a sneaky move. Shame 80/20 either didn't see through it or simply weighed up the deal and took the handout.
|
the idea is not plagerise, but use the PI pia as a framework to ensure all the relevant sections are included, without using any of their content.
the idea is in the absense of the official PI document to provide a fully independant one, which in the first paragraph makes it clear why it was written and the fact that all people who do not have a vested interest in phorm agree the DPI technology to be deployed breaks all the relevant regs (ripa, perc, dpa etc), then goes on to the main body which will included where the system break the relevant regs as part of the report.
this should then be presented to the press quoting we have done this to highlight the lack of this study and the fact it should have been part of any due diligence by BT etc, then wait for statements from phorm and BT
anyone want to help?
peter