Quote:
Originally Posted by Florence
Can I post this over on Bt forums R Jones?
|
I hereby grant permission for any (future) post of mine here, to be quoted on Beta forums by a forum member from C/F. And you can quote that one too.
---------- Post added at 11:59 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogodon
What i don't understand is, if the ICO has let them off with the trials because it would be "difficult" to explain to their customers; how do they intend on explaining it to their entire customer base if it ever goes live?
|
Well - they have a good read of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (came into force in May) and then they think very hard and write a very very
long Webwise invitation page, which
fairly and fully describes the ups and downs of the product, so consumers can make in informed choice, then they work out how to deliver that page to customers, without illegally intercepting browsing and only when they can properly IDENTIFY that it is the account holder they are communicating with by displaying the interstitial page (displaying it only when their customers are logged in to either bt.com or their BTYahoo home pages, with their unique account username and password - and NOT while anyone on their home network using the same external IP address is casually browsing the internet) - so McCavity the cat doesn't get involved - probably also asking for an extra password confirmation like they do with every other change to someone's account Terms and conditions or personal information.
Then they develop an opting-in solution that means that the NOT-OPTED-IN customers do not have their traffic intercepted, mirrored, profiled, copied or in any way, and that their traffic, their data packets coming along their broadband line do not contact any of the Phorm supplied DPI kit.
Then they work out a way of SEEKING (not inferring) the active informed consent of the entire world wide web's webmasters (several million) for the copying and exploitation of their intellectual content and the creation of forged cookies. Only those webmasters who actively GIVE that consent may have their sites profiled, copied, exploited or their domain names used in forged cookies, so that their competitors can pinch their traffic.
Then they get the all clear from guys and gals down at BT Retail legal department - absolutely rock solid - no possible problems with PECR, DPA, Fraud Act, MCA, criminal and civil copyright law etc. Because a big corporation like BT can't be seen to be breaking the law - oh no sir.
Then they make full disclosure to the ICO, and also make sure they have done due diligence by making sure the
final PIA has been fully published and is available to the relevant authorities, not least the general public.
Then they launch their trials and publish the full results (Premium Browsing Mark II:Research Findings) along with their original research findings (Premium Browsing:Research Findings).
I reckon they can get all that done easily - maybe in shall we say "a couple of weeks"?
Gavin Patterson will no doubt have had all that clearly in his head at the AGM on July 16th, when he predicted the trials would be starting in that time frame.
After all - if he didn't - it was a very unwise thing to announce wasn't it?