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

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by Mick

Sorry popper for not replying to this sooner, been out all day only got back an hour ago - I do want to get a news item up on recent developments. But this thread sure moves fast ...

Please ask if there are any points you need pointing out to make things easier for you considering some of us are addicts here. I've not been to work for 2 weeks after spending most of my time reading this thread.


Ok, I've not been to work more than a few days in the last two months but still........

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

Please ask if there are any points you need pointing out to make things easier for you considering some of us are addicts here. I've not been to work for 2 weeks after spending most of my time reading this thread.

Just keeping up with Darrens blog on the bbc site...

Is there anything this morning - afternoon that I have missed that I can quickly be fed uptodate on? I've have to trail back 80 or so posts and my eyes are tired ...

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Mick

Just keeping up with Darrens blog on the bbc site...

Is there anything this morning - afternoon that I have missed that I can quickly be fed uptodate on? I've have to trail back 80 or so posts and my eyes are tired ...

Hi Mick a reply from an Email sent to Simon Watkin HO http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34...-post3415.html

Nice quote from Alexander

He says: "What Phorm is trying to do is to turn people into products.; a global warehouse selling pieces of us to highest bidders."

[dav]

looks like Alexander made it in time...

EDIT...D'oh, John beat me to it

[rossco555]

Latest quote from Alexander..

Mr Hanff says: "Phorm has to be opt in. You can't take implied consent on a human right."
Mr Hanff argued that privacy is a human right.
He added: "I'm concern about the potential for use of the technology and the potential for creep."

[OF1975]

Not only did Alexander make it but from the little tidbits on the blog it sounds like hes doing rather well. I knew he would. Get 'em Alexander.

[TehTech]

I cannot even begin to think of a big enough way to thank Alexander for what he has done, by reading this thread (and it has taken a longtime, and not much has really sunk in due to all this information) it is clear that Alexander was and IS the best person to attend tonight, and even if he was the only member of public there, I know he'd shine more brightly than the opposition!

Alexander, if you are ever around CAMBS, I would love to buy you a few drinks, I know it aint much for all the effort you have put into this, but it'd be a firm way of showing my appreciation for all the effort & hard work you have put into this over the last few months!

Alexander for PM!!!

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by Mick

Just keeping up with Darrens blog on the bbc site...

Is there anything this morning - afternoon that I have missed that I can quickly be fed uptodate on? I've have to trail back 80 or so posts and my eyes are tired ...

I think that the main development from today has been that some people are starting to get replies from the home office as highlighted by Florence's post above. The home office are not giving a legal backing as it is beyond their remit but they do seem to be stuck on the issue of personally identifiable information as opposed to the legal issues of interception. They also make the ludicrous suggestion that RIPA exists as a tool to cover government and police bodies with regard to interception on a security level when this clearly is not the case as I read the parts relating to interception of telecommunications.

PhormUKPR returned after a layoff to spout the same, tired spin
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34...-post3441.html

I highlighted that phorm are working hard to convince the FTC that they have a viable and legal model and it's worrying that the FTC may agree that they will see behaviour target advertising as an acceptable model for business.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080414/20080414006002.html?.v=1

[Woodgar]

UPDATE 19.53: Phorm's technical officer Mark Burgess takes to the stage.

He emphasises that Phorm does not "compromise the user experience".

After concerns raised that Phorm can cause some page requests bouncing back and forth between the destination website and the Phorm system, he says that happens in less than 1% of the browsing experience.

That still seems awfully high.

And I'm not sure what he means by this: is it 1% of pages I visit, or 1% of http requests? The first case is bad enough, but in the second case that's going to be highly noticable if he means the problem can occur with any element on a page. Considering that some pages only render their main content *after* they have displayed all of the other fluff on the page, that could quickly become very tiresome.

On another issue, I would also like to thank all those who have given time to the cause and would be happy to contribute to an expenses/fighting fund if it became available.

[JackSon]

Originally Posted by Mick

Is there anything this morning - afternoon that I have missed that I can quickly be fed uptodate on? I've have to trail back 80 or so posts and my eyes are tired ...

Well, the most important thing I noted was that a flamewar was averted with the minimal of moderator interaction - whilst not being on topic I think it is noteworthy for this forum

[wecpc]

There are now 6 OIX advertisers now listed on BadPhorm which I have already added to my blocked sites.

http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi...ewforum.php?21

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by JackSon

Well, the most important thing I noted was that a flamewar was averted with the minimal of moderator interaction - whilst not being on topic I think it is noteworthy for this forum

Good point.

I do think that a forum which is mostly populated by intelligent and level-headed users will by the very nature of the users become mostly self moderating.

What I am doing here I'll never know

[dav]

This taken fom the VM feedback group...(thanks to Oar Wellin)

'Reply from EU Information, Society & Media Commissioner Viviane Reding

The Commission is aware of the activities of the company Phorm in the UK,
concerning the analysis of internet traffic for advertising purposes, the
agreement between Phorm and major internet service providers in the UK and
the concerns that have beep raised about the effects on privacy of these
activities. Privacy and the protection of personal data are fundamental
rights of the citizens of the EU. They are enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of
the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and also protected by the European
Convention on Human Rights and the related instruments of the Council of
Europe, to which all EU Member States are signatories.

The general principles for the protection of personal data are defined in
Directive 95/46/EC and complemented and particularized for electronic
communications by Directive 2002/58EC on privacy and electronic
communications (ePrivacy Directive).

The ePrivacy Directive obliges Member States to ensue the confidentiality of
communications and related traffic data through national legislation. In
particular, they shall prohibit listening, tapping, storage or other kinds
of interception or surveillance of communication and the related traffic
data by persons other than the users without their consent, which must be
freely given, specific and informed indication of the user's wishes. The
data concerned in this particular matter i.e. the content of search queries,
constitute communication within the meaning of this Directive and the URLs
used in the packets constitute traffic data. This data should therefore be
protected appropriately.'

[popper]

it seems darren's not updating much, is it because of no notewerthy quotes?, not likely, also i wonder if he will blog any Q&A....that must be happening right now.

Mick the main one i'd go for is as outlined in my reply to Florences HO email , #3429 (BTW this is easy, left click and drag highlight the No., right click and copy, then paste into your reply)

I.e Simon Watkin at HO got duped (better for the story and keeping on side for later feedback that way) into a general RIPA what-if chat, and Phorm apparently turned it into a massive PR spin favouring a legal rather than illegal PHorm , totally mis-representing the good name of Simon.... :spin works both ways and it seems perfectly true.

and that contrary to the Phorm line, it seems clear now that those 2006 trials were, as outlined by Simon in general terms, infact unlawful and a undenyable collecting and processing is clearly visable even to the untrained eye.

need to search for those Phormed web messes in the boards again and include them in any CF stories and use a big stick to point this trail out ,clear as day, the DPI kit breaks HO Simon Watkin's most basic outlined chat..