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

[Bonglet]

Another thing to notice is the whole real time deletion of data that is mentioned which is complete and utter rubbish why else do they use cookies.
And as for completely unidentifiable ermm so why do i have this random cookie then there should be nothing the cookie is classed by us the user and to them phorm and or anyone else as an identifier, sorry phorm but you dont have the funds, tech or know how to create a TRUE real time deletion.
Nothing is stored on our systems (because half is probably already masked in the cookie?)

If you also notice from nebuad's t&c's (which will more or less be phorms copy and paste) nebuad dosent profile your name,address e.t.c.
really?, lets have a closer look ahh no they dont because as part of the contract they can have all of the isp's account data about you too including ip address, name address e.t.c (smell the fish yet?).

[Chroma]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

I don't think you're reading too much into it at all. Remember that the equipment Phorm want to put into the ISP's infrastructure is equipment that the ISP cannot access, monitor, report on, audit or manage.

So neither the ISP nor any other independent (i.e. NON-Phorm) auditor can see anything that the box is doing, has done, or any changes made to the box's configuration.

As an IT professional I find that last point obscene. Allowing an unaudited, and unmanageable presence on a network infrastructure is unthinkable in my eyes.

The ISPs are actually trusting Phorm. That's the scary bit. If I said to any of the IT Directors I know "I want to place a bit of kit on your network that you won't have any access to whatsoever" I know what the response would be. And it wouldn't be pleasant!

This sounds "invertedly familiar?" with my current ISP's setup.

Im on a semi LLU connection, ie: BT provide my voice service, 3rd parties provide my data service, and if something goes wrong with the DSLAM for instance my ISP cannot access the equipment. BT wont allow anyone other than trained Openreach technicians inside their exchanges.
This results in major headaches for several customers but thats another issue.

The point is my ISP has only limited access and control of their equipment and ive been pondering the possibility of BT altering their Wholesale terms and conditions to include instalation of DPI Equipment on wholesale connections, basicly telling the smaller ISP's "We're installing this equpiment on our last mile of copper and you can either abide by this or run your own copper to each customers home."

I've asked my ISP about this several times and was responded on each turn with deafining silence. Which to be honest i find more than a little unsettling.

Of course im being purely speculative here but a simple reasuring answer from my ISP would go a long way.

Reading this thread today, I suggest members (esp the newer ones) take note of these;

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/90...ble-forum.html
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/90...reminders.html
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/90...m-members.html
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/90...tte-guide.html

Thank you.

[jellybaby]

I have noticed alot of webwise cookies building up on my computer.....anyone shed any light why ?


EDIT....forget that....me being dumb lol

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by Chroma

BT wont allow anyone other than trained Openreach technicians inside their exchanges.
This results in major headaches for several customers but thats another issue.

The point is my ISP has only limited access and control of their equipment and ive been pondering the possibility of BT altering their Wholesale terms and conditions to include instalation of DPI Equipment on wholesale connections, basicly telling the smaller ISP's "We're installing this equpiment on our last mile of copper and you can either abide by this or run your own copper to each customers home."

I've asked my ISP about this several times and was responded on each turn with deafining silence. Which to be honest i find more than a little unsettling.

Of course im being purely speculative here but a simple reasuring answer from my ISP would go a long way.

Don't start me off on BT and Openreach engineers. It's not just headaches they cause, it's stress, stratospheric blood pressure and so much more. Even now the sight of a BT logo ups my BP 30 points. I'm not joking.

Your speculation seems logical to me. I'm not sure of the legality of such a move but if they could get away with it I'm sure BT would go for it. Which could mean that smaller ISPs who have said they won't ever go down the Phorm route might find themselves shafted (can I use this word mod?) by BT...

[Deko]

Not sure if anyone Caught this ?

from advfn

RainInSpain - 21 Apr'08 - 18:30 - 1505 of 1551


Hey Hammy, rags, Ferdithinging et al.

I thought that the CFO posting on a bulletin board was a bit dodgy, as was the strange PHORM_JG avatar. So I contacted Phorm. You too can do it. Call Sarah Finch, the PA to Lynne Millar the CFO on 02072972067. Or email her at sarah.finch@phorm.com

Anyway, Phorm flatly deny giving permission or having knowledge that their senior officers are posting on ADVFN. So I guess thats what anonymity is like - you never really know whats going on....Maybe they're avatars of your own creation Hammy, hmm?

But I did enjoy your rather tragically breathless commentaries on their posts, and your convenient glossing over the fact that these 2 avatars seemingly disappeared when the hard questions were asked. Verrry smooth. Too smooth actually.

Ham and Rags I think you are paid rampers. You are either paid by Phorm directly or one of their 3 PR firms (Freud, Citigate or John Stonborough). Which is it? I have no investment position in Phorm, but this thread is entertaining, and your attempts at impersonating Phorm employees by parroting PR guff from an avatar are quite tops. Keep it up! Hey I might do one myself.

[popper]

Originally Posted by Paul Delaney

Isn't part of BT's stratergy to introduce a clause into the T&C's in order to satisfy legal issues?
I would have thought that was illegal and you say that it is.

The problem lies in the fact that on several sensitive issues (RIPA) they seem to have proceeded on the advice of the people who uphold the law and what we thought was strictly forbidden turns out to be perfectly OK as long as the criterion in some clause - paragraph three, subsection two is applicable and it's transpired that pivoting on an interpretation of the law, BT just happen to meet it!

I would like to see how they will word any addition to their T&Cs - One thing you can guarantee is that a £1000.00 pound a day barrister will be writing it!

its not illegal, but it is unenforceable as in a waste of ink if you take the time to pull them about it through the already mentioned ways....

its not the people that uphold the law but rather the people that practice the law, remember, in court one side always losses....

it doesnt matter if its a barrister on £1000 an hour, if theres law to make it against your stat rights (and there is see prior post), thats the way it is.

because you dont pull them about it, that is the reason they get away with it.


just because they call something 'industry practice' does not make it law... or legal.

---------- Post added at 18:17 ---------- Previous post was at 18:07 ----------

Originally Posted by Deko

Not sure if anyone Caught this ?

from advfn

url ?

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by popper

just because they call something 'industry practice' does not make it law... or legal.

Indeed.

I've had a call back from Virgin Media about the BBC article which says that VM "will automatically enrol anyone that does not explicitly ask to be excluded."

I have been advised that this report is wrong. Customers will not be forced to use Phorm if it is implemented. It is still not a foregone certainty that Phorm will be implemented.

So, if you're a VM customer then get writing to
Neil Berkett
CEO, Virgin Media
PO Box 333
Matrix Court
Swansea
SA7 9ZJ

Don't bother with e-mails to customer services. This is the address I've been given to write to in future. After recent outbursts, please keep it professional and civil.

I have already contacted BBC Newswatch about this (not that I expect a response) and this report has now been bought to the attention of higher ups at VM. I took the liberty of pointing VM to the public meeting videos too.

---------- Post added at 18:36 ---------- Previous post was at 18:22 ----------

Originally Posted by Deko

Not sure if anyone Caught this ?

from advfn

OK, so we have three possibilities.

One is that the comment does come from Lynne Millar but now word has gotten out Phorm are denying all knowledge.

Two is that the comment comes from one of Phorm's PR droids. Phorm's PR do have phorm in that area already, after all. Phorm are still denying all knowledge.

Either way there's an argument for possible market abuse here that needs to be investigated. "Ignorance is no excuse" as my law lecturer often said. Yes folks, I did a law unit at college too.

Three is that it's a complete fake. I'm sure the message board concerned logs the IP addresses of everyone who posts so it can be traced and identified. I would certainly hope that to be the case.

In which case what are Phorm's PR drones and supporters doing if they can't spot a fake posting from the company they work for or follow?

[popper]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

All this talk of cookies helps obfuscate the debate here. There is only one acceptable opt out, something that Phorm never mentioned until last Tuesday night: a network based opt-out which stops the customers' data going anywhere near Phorm's systems.

The cookie thing is irrelevant if your data is still being logged/mirrored/recorded by the Phorm system.

Where the BBC technology article says "the other two [ISPs] will automatically enrol anyone that does not explicitly ask to be excluded." that is an interesting interpretation of "users will not be forced to use the system" which VM have twice said to me.

Time to demand clarification.

as iv already said way back, after a mear 10 minutes logical thought, there is only one way any of this can be done legally, and its not good for the (like-)Phorm profit model.

there is no Opt-out model that can work ,OR an Opt-In model other than the one below,while they are rapeing the world wide websites for part of their pirated datasets for profit...with layer7 kit installed and based from inside the EU given the existing UK/EU laws .


theres ONLY one single Option that is viable from a fully legal POV, and thats the old 'walled garden' approach, as in, everyone must opt-in to it if they so choose after informed consent.and their going to want their wad/slice of the cake for any such use of their data copyright if they have any sense at all.....

and that includes the websites they intend rapeing for data as well as the user , then anything inside the internal walled garden can not escape ,and more importantly almost nothing can get inside.

i say almost nothing as its possible some users and websites might take outside content and place it inside the wall but thats another story and doesnt concern us as yet......

Originally Posted by popper

url ?

You'll need to register there to see it but:

http://www.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread....3044&from=1387

"Phorm JG - 18 Apr'08 - 14:30 - 1388 of 1551

Hi, JG from Phorm IR team here. Just following up from Lynne's post, we're here to clarify inaccuracies that are being posted and to give investors some context for the phorm story.

doowIE, you seem to have grasped the wrong end of the stick as regards Phorm's business model. Click through fees are not the issue; we support both CPC and CPM models and campaigns of both types compete with each other on the basis of their effective CPM (eCPM)

Publishers set the CPM for each ad slot for which they want to enable OIX relevant ads. When the OIX matches a unique user with one or more relevant campaigns, the most valuable ad above the Publisher’s price serves. Phorm and the ISP share the added value that comes with serving a more highly targeted ad – and where there there is a very high differential between the advertiser’s value for that user and the Publisher’s price, Phorm can share in a much higher rate than you list in your example.

For example, if the advertiser sets a £10 CPM to reach an in-market car buyer, and the ad is shown on a long-tail Publisher with a £1 price, the differential is £9, which Phorm splits with the ISP. Conversely, if the Publisher rate is £0.50 and the most valuable campaign is £1.50, Phorm splits the £1 with the ISP.

Fortunately, with Phorm’s perspective on the browsing data, each unique user can potentially have scores of ad campaign opportunities to ensure that an ad will serve in the most ad slots and to the advantage of everyone in the advertising ecosystem.

Take a look at www.phorm.com and the 'Introducing the OIX' flash presentation which shows you revenue flows between the players:

http://www.phorm.com"



AND



Phorm - 18 Apr'08 - 12:09 - 1362 of 1396


Hello, This is Lynne Millar, CFO of Phorm. For some time now, there has been
a great deal of misinformation about the system which we are rolling out
with the UK’s three largest ISPs and what it actually does. That's not
surprising, because it is a complicated system. In an effort to engage with
those who have privacy concerns in particular, we have taken a number of
steps to correct any misinformation and better explain how the system works.
However, we have not to date engaged with the investment community on
bulletin boards such as this one. We will now begin to do so in the interest
of presenting a fair and accurate picture of where we stand. We will not be
introducing new information, simply correcting misperceptions by calling
attention to easily verifiable facts already in the public domain.

Here are the three main areas of misunderstanding:

1) Our three ISP partners have strongly reassured us that they are in
no way reconsidering their decision to deploy or are in any way reducing
their level of commitment to the project

2) All advertisers, agencies and UK publishers that we have a dialogue
with retain a strong interest in our project and eagerly await launch

3) We have taken substantial legal advice and are confident that we
satisfy all legal requirements that could threaten any aspect of our
business model, whether relating to the way the technology works or the way
in which it is deployed.

I will periodically be addressing questions as time permits but
members of our team will be stepping in as necessary to correct glaring
errors of fact.

We are more excited than ever about our project. We are convinced that
over the coming weeks and months, its full significance to the online
advertising industry will be understood in the wider market and the press
and our need for outreach in forums such as this will diminish.


Regards,

Lynne Millar, CFO







.

[CaptJamieHunter]

Oh good, so the post did come from Lynne Millar. Let's see what the FSA have to say about it now I've put that post into context.

[Bonglet]

Well we would end up paying that isp for little to no full internet access i think popper, as you could try and get on any site but they deny you access to it as you are demed a danger to that website of data carrying and that data could be sold off to another company to make a replica of such a site.

[popper]

yes thats true, but they say you can Opt-out on the fly, so they can auto opt you out when you want past the wall, and Opt you back in again when you return, as long as they dont look at the cached data on your harddrive that was placed there from outside.....,hence another story yes!, or perhaps their not as truthful or on the fly as they say perhaps

perhaps id better copywrite this, so 'its my idea, it belongs to me, you cant have it, pay me my fees and ill consider or not, leting you use it non exclusively'

i may put all the fees to a good use

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by R Jones

Here's the reply when I emailed Amazon about Phorm and their site: seems they may already be a Phorm partner.

"Dear Customer,

What makes the technology behind OIX and Webwise truly groundbreaking is that it takes consumer privacy protection to a new level. Our technology doesn't store any personally identifiable information or IP addresses, and we don't retain information on user browsing behaviour. So we never know - and can't record - who's browsing, or where they've browsed.

If you have any concerns, please highlight them to your internet service provider.

Thank you for shopping at Amazon.co.uk

Please let us know if this e-mail answered your question:

If yes, click here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/***
If not, click here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/***

Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming e-mail.

To contact us about an unrelated issue, please visit the Help section of our website.
Warmest regards
name (anonymized by me!)
Amazon.co.uk"

A definite whiff of Phorm PR in that one I think. So Amazon look as if they are in bed with Phorm.

and when I clicked the No this isn't satisfactory button I got this email

Dear Customer,

Please ignore my previous email which was sent erroneously. I apologise for the same.

I have reviewed the previous correspondence with you, and I offer my sincere apologies for any misunderstanding thus far.

I do understand your concern in this regard.

I have passed your message on to the appropriate department
in our company for investigation. Customer feedback such as yours
helps us to continue improving the selection and service we
provide. We appreciate the time you've taken to write to us.

If you have any other suggestions for us or would like to make a
comment at another time, please don't hesitate to send us an
e-mail. To do this, please visit our Help Desk at the following URL:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/contact-us

We'll look forward to hearing from you. Thank you for shopping at
Amazon.co.uk.

Warmest regards


named person
Amazon.co.uk

[Chroma]

Somewhat related article on ArsTechnica

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ke-a-buck.html

certain ISPs have turned the responsibility of ad streaming over to a third-party vendor, Barefruit, who managed to bungle the job.

Seems things on the other side of the pond are in fairly bad shape too, is it just me or have more and more of these shady ad brokers poped up?