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

[unicus]

Originally Posted by SimonHickling

I actually think that somebody at Phorm has had a good thinking head on for this.

Nothing they are doing is illegal (if what we've been told is true). All the illegality occurs before the "Phorm servers" get the data. Unless inciting a breach of RIPA is illegal, it is only the ISP which is guilty of interception, they are also the ones processing personal data to anonymise it.

Not a good enough head. Inciting any crime is a crime in itself and I would say that even if the breach of RIPA is carried out before the Phorm controlled equipment they are more complicit than just inciting (which is bad enough).

Regarding Kent and the Click recording - I couldn't of expected anything else from Kent, the man oozes arrogance and ignorance so well done Alexander for not coming down to his level (though I very much doubt you could if you tried)

[markt50]

Originally Posted by tdadyslexia

Here, Here, well done Alexander.

Completely agree, well done Alexander, and thankyou for all the work you're putting into this

Well, I can't say I'm surprised at the way Kent seems to have behaved. I'm sure it wasn't a nice experience for you Alexander, but it really proves to me how much the pressure is starting to get to Phorm and in particulat Kent if he is not even capable of civility. I'd take it as a complement, it shows that you are getting somewhere for him to resort to treating you as if you were an enemy.

To quote Winston Churchill:

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

[JohnnyWashngo]

Regarding the Early Day Motion 1311 (http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...px?EDMID=35552).

Have we got a template or standard letter which we are sending our MPs to bring this EDM to their attention?

Having looked at the signatories on the site, I notice my MP, Phil Willis, is not present and I would like to contact his office to ascertain whether or not he is aware of the EDM or the problem it is trying to address?

Cheers.

[vicz]

Simon's point is a good one. Entertaining though it may be to hurl abuse at 121media and their b@st@rd scumware offspring, it IS the ISP's who are the villains who are prepared to experiment illegally on their customers. privacy be damned! Say Phorm are forced out of business, do you think the ISPs will stop looking?

[roadrunner69]

Just had a reply from my MP, Bob Ainsworth (Lab)
He states that he has taken up this issue with both the Minister concerned(?) and Michael Cashman MEP, Labour's spokesperson in the European Parliament on Justice and Home Affairs and has asked them both to respond.

Judging from the members on here who have had replys from their representatives over the last few days, this issue does, at last seem to be gaining a bit of momentum in parliament.

[popper]

btw , No.36 and No.37

[jelv]

Can someone remind me of the website to use for contacting your MP which tracks if they respond please.

[roadrunner69]

Originally Posted by jelv

Can someone remind me of the website to use for contacting your MP which tracks if they respond please.

http://www.writetothem.com/

[AlexanderHanff]

Something occurred to me earlier regarding OIX. Normally advertising is delivered based on the clients target audience which includes countries they wish to advertise in.

Given that OIX doesn't use IP at all (the normal method of determining which country someone is in) how are they going to ensure that a company Idaho who only deal with US customers, aren't going to be advertised to someone in the UK, or Singapore, or anywhere else in the world?

Phorm plan to take this system international so presumably their OIX platform will have a number of clients who only want to advertise to their local demographic? This is likely to deliver a lot of poorly targeted adverts and cost clients money.

Of course, the only way for OIX to do this would be to either have a separate server for each country (which would still require the use of IP to know which OIX server to grab the ads from) or they are going to need to add something about the user's country into the cookie.

The realms of privacy "protection" are shrinking daily it seems. Country of residence is private information.

Alexander Hanff

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by vicz

Simon's point is a good one. Entertaining though it may be to hurl abuse at 121media and their b@st@rd scumware offspring, it IS the ISP's who are the villains who are prepared to experiment illegally on their customers. privacy be damned! Say Phorm are forced out of business, do you think the ISPs will stop looking?

This battle will set precedents.

It is being fought on two fronts: the Phorm front and the ISP front. Until some aggrieved BT customers who were affected by the secret tests get BT's corporate backside into court the ISPs will still keep looking into this technology. As seemingly far better informed people than the ISPs seem to be we need to educate the ISPs that what they are doing is illegal and unethical. We can do this by pressuring them as customers who will leave if they implement Phorm and by educating people everywhere about what Phorm really is and really represents.

If BT suffers a heavy legal judgement then that will shatter confidence in them, in Phorm and severely damage any thoughts ISPs might have about using this "product".

VM reiterated to me yesterday that it is not a forgeone conclusion that Phorm will be implemented. So keep up the pressure on Virgin Media and they may decide not to implement. The Guardian have already rejected Phorm with a very polite but scathing put down.

Phorm clearly see people like us as a major threat to their scheme. Making as many people as possible aware of the facts about Phorm (making sure people know this cookie business is all horse manure, your data still goes to their systems unless a true network based opt out is provided), showing Phorm in its true light and pressuring government to finally realise that inaction about BT and Phorm is not an option.

It's an ongoing battle - pressure needs to be kept up on the ISPs and Phorm and awareness needs to be increased.

I see PhormUKPRteam have disappeared again...

[popper]

Exactly and thats why i keep mentioning the small claims and injunctions and learning to use them to our advantage....
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12...l#post34535463

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

This battle will set precedents.

It is being fought on two fronts: the Phorm front and the ISP front. Until some aggrieved BT customers who were affected by the secret tests get BT's corporate backside into court the ISPs will still keep looking into this technology. As seemingly far better informed people than the ISPs seem to be we need to educate the ISPs that what they are doing is illegal and unethical. We can do this by pressuring them as customers who will leave if they implement Phorm and by educating people everywhere about what Phorm really is and really represents.

snip

It's an ongoing battle - pressure needs to be kept up on the ISPs and Phorm and awareness needs to be increased.

I see PhormUKPRteam have disappeared again...

I agree with this, but for myself, I know my ISP (BT) would be delighted to see me leave, probably give me a golden handshake just to get rid of me, so I think I will stay on as an irritant.

Some more BT responses pending - I'll be back when I've got the email.

Roll on with those "secret trial" court cases! (both civil and criminal)
It will be so interesting comparing what BT say under oath in court, with what they have been saying in public up to now.

Remember - the proposed latest trials by BT have been delayed for well over a month. About six weeks ago, BT managers were even saying (mistakenly) they had started, then that they would be starting in mid-March. They have not been delayed for nothing. Massive rethink going on - because they know they daren't break the law for a third year running! The first two times, 2006 & 2007, it was illegal interception without informed consent. This time they really have to be sure it's all legal, including the RIPA, DPA, and that nasty business of somehow getting informed consent from website owners, and not breaking browsing for those who block unwanted Webwise/Phorm domains, and working out how they can make the trial invitation legally in the first place ( I think they were planning just to interrupt a browsing session, now I think they are realising that they have to do it via their own customer service site on a customer visit to bt.com or the BTYahoo! home page.)

And what's happening? - delay! If they were as confident of legality as they claim to be publicly, those trials would have already happened. And for the whole of those 6 weeks the Phorm share price has been falling, falling falliing - I see after yesterdays brief rally its headed off down again. Good.

That's all a guess on my part, we'll see how it pans out. Keep up the great work people!

[vicz]

Deep Packet Inspection is a technology that can't be uninvented, so I guess that this is just one of many privacy battles that lie ahead. I could understand an argument (without necessarily supporting it) that DPI could be used to counter kiddie-porn, or terrorism, or even Spam, but it is somewhat bizarre that the first application to hit the streets is for something as morally useless as advertising. However I can't help feeling that the ISPs are going to find themselves on the wrong side of the DPI argument once HMG starts applying the snooping pressure, at which point they may find themselves regretting taking the Phorm $$$.

[mark777]

Originally Posted by popper

btw , No.36 and No.37

No.800

[popper]

glad someones keeping track of the yes's