Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 316

The Other Steve · 24-04-2008, 17:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbadcol

He has admited he has no problem with having his privacy invaded.

You, on the other hand, supposedly have a BIG problem with people's privacy being invaded. Isn't that what this is all about ?

AlexanderHanff · 24-04-2008, 17:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Other Steve

You, on the other hand, supposedly have a BIG problem with people's privacy being invaded. Isn't that what this is all about ?

Yeah we need to get off this silly streak on iii it does nothing for the cause at all. Stooping to the level of the very people we are fighting is not the way to win the battle and certainly won't get us anywhere closer to winning the war.

The best way to stop a troll is to ignore them.

Alexander Hanff

mark777 · 24-04-2008, 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones

Here's the committee
Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee Members
{snip}

Thanks for this. I had a stooge around myself and amended my earlier post.

Oddly, I got a slightly different list of names from :-

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ee_members.cfm

popper · 24-04-2008, 17:52

The Other Steve

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Other Steve

You, on the other hand, supposedly have a BIG problem with people's privacy being invaded. Isn't that what this is all about ?

agreed....

BTW not that im trying to track you OCYU LOL, but are you the same one posting on the reg etc, good to see you join the CF and the fight

The Other Steve · 24-04-2008, 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by popper

The Other Steve

agreed....

BTW not that im trying to track you OCYU LOL, but are you the same one posting on the reg etc, good to see you join the CF and the fight

Yes, that's me, de-lurking to say hello, almost seems rude to have been following the thread for so long without saying anything at all.

CaptJamieHunter · 24-04-2008, 18:04

El Reg carries a Home Office attempted cop out in response to the FIPR at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...phorm_fipr_bt/

Just passing through, btw.

AlexanderHanff · 24-04-2008, 18:05

Here we go:

Jamie beat me to it, link removed.

Alexander Hanff

OF1975 · 24-04-2008, 18:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Yeah we need to get off this silly streak on iii it does nothing for the cause at all. Stooping to the level of the very people we are fighting is not the way to win the battle and certainly won't get us anywhere closer to winning the war.

The best way to stop a troll is to ignore them.

Alexander Hanff

Agreed. I think I will give it a wide berth for a few days and let things "settle" for a while unless there is major news.

Rchivist · 24-04-2008, 18:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777

Thanks for this. I had a stooge around myself and amended my earlier post.

Oddly, I got a slightly different list of names from :-

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ee_members.cfm

Science and Technology committee is now dead. Long live the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee, which replaces it, and Adam Afriye isn't on it anymore, but Tim Boswell is.
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...us/members.cfm

The old S&T site still exists.
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ee_members.cfm
and its dissolution is described here
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta..._committee.cfm

AlexanderHanff · 24-04-2008, 18:14

So basically the Home Office have just stated:

"Our public statement was not based on any technical analysis or any legal analysis and is in fact not even worth the paper it is printed on. Phorm's shares are worth more than our statement, please ignore it."

Of course the irony here is that they state only the courts can make a legal judgement, yet they refuse to investigate the issue either themselves or through the police they control, in order to get the courts to make a judgement in the first place.

Alexander Hanff

jelv · 24-04-2008, 18:18

Are we heading towards a judicial review in to the refusal of the HO and police to investigate?

AlexanderHanff · 24-04-2008, 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by jelv

Are we heading towards a judicial review in to the refusal of the HO and police to investigate?

I don't think it is going to come to that. The Home Office or the Police (under the instruction of the Home Office) will have to take action eventually, their position is completely untenable. With pressure from Europe, MPs, Lords and the Public, they really have no choice.

They will drag their heals and throw hissy fits first, but eventually something will be done.

That's my opinion anyway.

Alexander Hanff

OF1975 · 24-04-2008, 18:30

My letter to the computer crime unit of the met police should have landed on their desk this morning. Will let ya'll know if anything comes of it. Lets just say that I aren't holding my breath.

Rchivist · 24-04-2008, 18:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

So basically the Home Office have just stated:

"Our public statement was not based on any technical analysis or any legal analysis and is in fact not even worth the paper it is printed on. Phorm's shares are worth more than our statement, please ignore it."

Of course the irony here is that they state only the courts can make a legal judgement, yet they refuse to investigate the issue either themselves or through the police they control, in order to get the courts to make a judgement in the first place.

Alexander Hanff

I have this 70 year old picture of a BT executive in front of a microphone at Heston Aerodrome, saying

"...the settlement of the Phorm/Webwise problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all of the internet may find Phorm. This morning I didn't have another talk with Home Office, but here is the paper which bears Simon Watkin's name upon it although not mine, (waves paper to the PhormPRTeam - receiving loud cheers and "Hear Hears" ). Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you ...".

Later, from the dock of the court, the same executive, holding the same note, says, "My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Telecom executive has returned from Ertugrul bringing Phorm with honour. I believe it is Phorm for our time."

Apologies to Wikipedia. Permission for reproduction granted.

The Other Steve · 24-04-2008, 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

They will drag their heals and throw hissy fits first...

Alexander Hanff

Probably for just long enough to make sure their own behinds are covered.

I think it's significant that they have taken pains, once again, to emphasise the actual status of the HO note. (e.g. it means essentially squat.)

It's not enough, but at least it seems that they are washing their hands of any responsibility for the reassurances of legality that BT/Phorm?et al claim to have had.

So, no Offcom, ICO is actually investigating them*, and no HO note.

I forget, who else did they say they'd asked ? Oh well, back to the letter writing.

*stop sniggering.