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

[3x2]

Ultimately it is a free commercial market and providers of goods and services need only ensure they are compliant with relevant legislation.

And when they are not compliant?

[CWH]

Firstly apologies if this comes across slightly incoherent, but I'm trying to get my ducks in a row.
Assuming BT has a legitimate technical reason to carry out these multiple trials, why haven't the other two ISP's also been doing trials? Does it possibly indicate that there might be an unknown agreement, (to us,) that BT is doing all the technical trials on behalf of all three ISP's.
If that is so, and it feels as though it could well be - to me at least; does that imply that if a legal challenge against the BT trials were successful, then the other two ISP's could well be implicated. At least, they could be seen to have encouraged an illegal act.

Colin

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by CWH

Firstly apologies if this comes across slightly incoherent, but I'm trying to get my ducks in a row.
Assuming BT has a legitimate technical reason to carry out these multiple trials, why haven't the other two ISP's also been doing trials? Does it possibly indicate that there might be an unknown agreement, (to us,) that BT is doing all the technical trials on behalf of all three ISP's.
If that is so, and it feels as though it could well be - to me at least; does that imply that if a legal challenge against the BT trials were successful, then the other two ISP's could well be implicated. At least, they could be seen to have encouraged an illegal act.

Colin

In which case, BT would (hypothetically) have to grass the others up, and try and negotiate a deal, or else they might (allegedly) be left with Phorm in the dock, BT for (allegedly) "doing" the crime and Phorm for (allegedly) inciting it. It'll be a while before anyone's in court.

[Bonglet]

Vm would have to do there own trials as there network is different to bt, therefore i still think vm have had some sort of illegal trial at some point, always the stance of we dont know if were in or out, never have i heard a statement of "i can state 100% vm held no trials in relation to phorm" from anyone and there silence gives me the feeling there hiding something .

[3x2]

Originally Posted by CWH

Why BT?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...orm_interview/

Is BT comfortable with the role played by Stratis Scleparis, who was CTO of BT Retail during the trials, and is now CTO of Phorm?

[Rchivist]

The second of my MEP replies - Labour this time.

Dear Mr Jones

Thanks for your email to *** about these issues. I will pass your comments
on to ***.

Concerning the issue with Phorm and ISPs, the Information Commission's
Office has advised that, in accordance with European Law, service providers
should only use agencies such as Phorm when the customer opts in to do so.
This seems to be the sensible way forward.

Yours truly

*** ***
Political Assistant to *** *** MEP
European Parliamentary Labour Party
Socialist Group

[AlexanderHanff]

I just had a reply from Mr Bohm, I won't paste it because I never asked his permission, but he is looking into my concerns on complicit users and will try to read my paper over the next few days. His reply was a courtesy to acknowledge receipt of my email.

I will get back to you all once he has had a chance to get back to me. I have to say, it is nice that people such as Mr Bohm, Earl of Northesk etc. are so engaged with the public on this issue.

Alexander Hanff

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

I just had a reply from Mr Bohm, I won't paste it because I never asked his permission, but he is looking into my concerns on complicit users and will try to read my paper over the next few days. His reply was a courtesy to acknowledge receipt of my email.

I will get back to you all once he has had a chance to get back to me. I have to say, it is nice that people such as Mr Bohm, Earl of Northesk etc. are so engaged with the public on this issue.

Alexander Hanff

Completely agree with ya there. Good to know that not everyone has defected over to the dark side - even though they have better cookies

[Tarquin L-Smythe]

Originally Posted by R Jones

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

Member Constituency Party
Mr Phil Willis (Chairman) Harrogate and Knaresborough Liberal Democrats
Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods City of Durham Labour
Mr Tim Boswell Daventry Conservative
Mr Ian Cawsey Brigg and Goole Labour
Mrs Nadine Dorries Mid Bedfordshire Conservative
Dr Ian Gibson Norwich North Labour
Dr Evan Harris Oxford West & Abingdon Liberal Democrats
Dr Brian Iddon Bolton South East Labour
Mr Gordon Marsden Blackpool South Labour
Dr Bob Spink Castle Point Other
Ian Stewart Eccles Labour
Graham Stringer Manchester, Blackley Labour
Dr Desmond Turner Brighton, Kemptown Labour
Mr Rob Wilson Reading East Conservative

and AFAICS - only Phil Willis has signed the EDM 1311
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...52&SESSION=891

The lords has a Science and Technology committee with our friend the Earl of Northesk on it
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamenta...ct_members.cfm

Members

Members were appointed on 13 November 2007.

Lord Sutherland of Houndwood (Chairman)
Lord Colwyn
Lord Crickhowell
Lord Haskel
Lord Howie of Troon
Lord Krebs
Lord May of Oxford
Lord Methuen
Earl of Northesk
Lord O'Neill of Clackmannan
Lord Patel
Earl of Selborne
Lord Taverne
Lord Warner

Co-opted for the Systematics and Taxonomy inquiry:
Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior
Baroness Walmsley

Co-opted for the Personal Internet Security follow-up inquiry:
Lord Broers
Earl of Erroll

All easily accessible on parliament website
http://www.parliament.uk/

I note My MP's name can it be the same person who replied to my Email Thus


ROBER T WILSON MP Reading East


HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON SWIA OAA



Mr Robert xxxxxxx xx xxxxxxx Court Reading RG2 xxx
09 April 2008
Dear Mr Caswell,
Thank you for your letter dated 28th March regarding the security of your web browsing. I presume you are referring to plans to crack down on illegal file sharing.
There is clearly a problem with the illegal downloading of music and films, and we must take a tough stance on piracy. The British Phonographic Industry has estimated that the music industry has lost over £1 billion in 2005 as a result of illegal file¬sharing. The Government has dithered for several years on what action to take to combat this problem. This delay has meant that illegal downloads have increased dramatically to the detriment of our creative industries.
I share your concerns about recent reports suggesting that the Government will introduce legislation to force internet service providers (ISPs) to take action against users accessing pirate material. It is my belief that legislation should only be considered as a last resort. ISPs do need to take action over illegal downloading, but I would like to see them close down offending sites and block access where necessary without legislation compelling them to do so.
As my Conservative colleagues have argued, there are better ways of tackling this problem rather than imposing more legislation on the industry. Conservatives welcome and support the move to give Trading Standards officers the powers to seize pirate and bootleg CDs that breach copyright law, even if they do not bear infringing trademarks following the Gower Review of Intellectual Property, which was published in December 2006.
In addition, as David Cameron has argued, we should consider education policies to raise public awareness of intellectual property rights. In July 2007, he called on the Government to work in partnership with the industry to get the message across that buying pirate CDs and illegally downloading music is wrong and has a serious impact on the creative industries. Part of the challenge we face is that many people simply do not see anything wrong in downloading music or films, and we must therefore change people's mindsets.
My colleagues in the Shadow Culture, Media and Sport team will be scrutinising the Government's proposals in the Creative Industries paper when it is published.



Westminster Secretary: 020 7219 2498


robwilsonmp@parliament.uk

[Tharrick]

Adam Afriye isn't on it anymore, but Tim Boswell is.

Oh really? Just as well I wrote to him then, since he's my MP.

Still waiting for a response.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Tarquin L-Smythe

robwilsonmp@parliament.uk

I presume you will be casting your vote the other way then based on his complete incompetence or ability to even read your original email.

And we wonder why the country is in a mess?

Alexander Hanff

[jelv]

Originally Posted by jelv

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

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

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.

I wish I had your confidence!

If they dig their heels in, would a judicial review be the most appropriate next step? I guess the other possibility would be something from the EU - but we all know how long that might take.

I would have thought that we should be aiming to get an investigation under way before the BT trials are due to start. Would that then give an opportunity for an injunction suspending the trials until the legality had been established?

If the authorities get a feel for how far this campaign is prepared to go, would it not increase the pressure on them to instigate an investigation?

[AlexanderHanff]

Slightly off topic (well very actually) but I take it you all heard the news of the preliminary judgement from the High Court on unlawful bank charges today?

My Masters fees might have just found a new sponsor

Alexander Hanff

[dav]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

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.

Hmmmm....I think this goes some way to removing the 'comfort' part from Kent's 'letter of comfort from the Home Office.' In no way are the HO saying it is legal or not, merely that it has not been tested in a court of law (yet).

I think the HO are back-pedaling a little to distance themselves from the apparent Phorm-friendly stance they previously allowed Phorm to spout about.

Recent days go to show that governmental u-turns are not impossible. Give the HO a little time to breathe and they may well come around to our way of thinking and realise that their real boss is Joe Public and not some shyster out to make a quick buck off the backs of ordinary folk.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by jelv

I wish I had your confidence!

If they dig their heels in, would a judicial review be the most appropriate next step? I guess the other possibility would be something from the EU - but we all know how long that might take.

I would have thought that we should be aiming to get an investigation under way before the BT trials are due to start. Would that then give an opportunity for an injunction suspending the trials until the legality had been established?

If the authorities get a feel for how far this campaign is prepared to go, would it not increase the pressure on them to instigate an investigation?

Well pressure is only increasing from all quarters. What we should all do next is write a letter of complaint to our MPs regarding the Police and Home Office inaction explaining that we are complaining in line with the procedures required leading up to a complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

If I remember correctly, the procedures are to first write to your MP and if your MP is unable to resolve the issue, you can then write to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

A few thousand letters to the PO should be enough to cause sufficient mayhem to maybe get something done. Failing that, Judicial Review would probably be our next course of action.

Incidentally, Kent stated on Tuesday (eventually after lots of prying by the BBC) that the services are going to roll out in the next few weeks. Of course, we already know this to be untrue because BT have not even started their planned trials yet so for the system to be deployed fully in a few weeks would literally be impossible.

Alexander Hanff