Quote:
Originally Posted by bluecar1
way to go, Earl of Errol
i think we have a new allie, have not seen the name before, alex, give that man an invite
peter
|
The Earl is someone who (IMHO) would not be happy with the implemtation of Phorm/Webwise. He is a man very concerned with data protection and civil liberties.
I read an excellent debate in which both he and Baroness Miller spoke. You can read it here:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/...8-06-12a.724.5
You guys might finds the debate interesting. What I know you will find interesting is this paragraph spoken by Baroness Miller: (My bold)
Quote:
|
I was talking with the chief executive of Phorm this week who told me that once something is stored you have lost control over it. Phorm has been the subject of an interesting article in the Economist recently which some of your Lordships may have read. It is a company on the cutting edge of what can protect the public. A bit of controversy surrounds its work because, with its client BT, it intercepted people's online business without BT customers knowing. But Phorm is certainly correct when it says that if consumers knew what was actually stored they would decide to opt for true anonymity online. This is what Phorm is trying to develop with major telecommunications clients on a global scale.
|
Source: http://www.publications.parliament.u...80612-0009.htm - Column 726
Is it just me, or did the CEO of Phorm actually
mislead the Baroness to what Phorm actually does? I think he did.
Anyway, the Earl of Errol is a good man (with great understanding of the data protection minefield) and, from what I have read, I doubt if he would let Phorm anywhere near his browsing. (My opinion.)
OB