Quote:
Originally Posted by popper
im more interested in why the spokesperson for the ICO said that quote, im assuming at least that part is word accurate!
and the "be able to prove their assertions" now its they BT/Phorm need to prove they are telling the truth...
they have had independent technical experts look at it and say its unlawful, yet i assume another seperate ICO spokesman says they will take no action [at this time]....
[]the classic get out clause later.
|
It's always "a spokesperson said this" and "a spokesperson said that"!
What's the matter with them, are they ashamed to give their names?
Or perhaps they're afraid to be personally associated to the comments when they are eventuall proven to be crap?
See.. i'm actually starting to get very agitated by all this now.
The only name gleaned form the dozens of press releases is a Phorm spokesman, Alex Laity, who said...
"We are confident that we are fully compliant with all relevant laws," he said. "We did go to the ICO before launch, we did go to the Home Office before launch, we did do due diligence to make sure what we did is fully compliant with the law."
@BT
You keep spouting "BT sought expert legal advice before commencing the trial."
Well, how about disclosing who these 'experts' were? and disclosing the advice you were given?