Quote:
Originally Posted by philj
|
I always feel that it is worrying, whenever DPA is mentioned, no one seems to see beyond the direct marketing packages offered which needs your name and address data to send to you.
Since adware was first invented, 'no personal information' has been the selling point.
The DPA needs to be improved. There is no way whereby anonymous data should be able to be used to send me direct marketing which is based on 'something' which I have done.
If the marketing response is personalised, the underlying data used MUST be personal and not anonymous, even if the elements making up that data have not been explicitly mentioned by the DPA as personal data.
I recall reading a document on the ICO site which suggested that this type of amendment needed to be made.
The problem is that even if tracking cookies like the UID are classed as personal data under the DPA, all the business using the data has to do is register with the ICO and use the data as per their registration and privacy policy and no one is any better off.
About as efficient as eTrust certifying some of the sites that have been certified - it has reached the stage now that when I see an eTrust certificate, I avoid the site like the plague. Rather like the spammers success in promoting the latest anti-spamming legislation.
---------- Post added at 14:31 ---------- Previous post was at 14:16 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dephormation
I did wonder if the person who posted that analysis might have been a trial victim, who got confused by the injection of Javascript code into his pages (which in itself demonstrates what a stupid idea modifying anyones private communications is, for the telco not just the recipient).
But that post I linked to dates from April 2006, supposedly well before the BT trials in Q3/Q4 2006.
|
If you look at the thread on badphorm when people were searching for the remains of the 2006/7 trials, early 2006 did show some traces. And, once they started to identify the ISP in the javascript, there were a few different ISPs indicated. Would it have been as few as the 10 ISPs mentioned in the 121Media report? - now, why does it only appear to have been BT that did not run a mile after the trials? Perhaps the rest got tired of waiting and joined up with Adzilla, NebuAd, Barefruit and FrontPorch, etc.