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

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by Tharrick

In addition, it really doesn't help. Say I want to go out and hurt somebody for whatever reason (perhaps they look different from me, perhaps I don't like the clothes they're wearing or the music they listen to). All the CCTV does is mean that there's a higher chance that their body will still be warm by the time the police arrive at the scene.

And apparently even when the video is filmed under perfect conditions (such as an unedited public television interview on BBC Breakfast or C4 News for example) the Police won't use it because they don't want to.

I have sought extensive le-le-le-legal advice.

Pete

[OldBear]

Finally, Phorm story on Neowin's front page: http://www.neowin.net

Comments here: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/0...to-home-office

[popper]

more than that Alexander, its a "Consumer Contract" and so comes under stricter rules that Always favour the End User in all things (Small Claims, County Court).

you can also be pritty sure (as Vm do all the time) that BT will forward any bogus "remainder of their 12/18 month contracts." to your friendly CRA (Experion,etc) credit file, each and every month without fail.

if your credits not great anyway, you can have fun forcing the CRA's to stop Prosessing your data by removing that right, and force them to use manual records etc,and in effect stops the 3rd party companys adding data to your file, or others accessing it through automated computer systems, see CAG

and so you should also make an Official Final Notice in writing and registered post, to the effect that if they do try and add Bogus charges to your Credit file and so effect your rating etc then you WILL be enforcing your rights in the small claims courts for damages and removal of data (NOT marked as cleared...)etc.

the the CAG CRA threads for how these business accounts departments try and mess with your Credit files, its a disgrace.

you can also Instruct the ISP Data controller to delete in full any and all Personal Data held by them on you the data subject forthwith as the contract is no longer in force and they have no rights to keep Your data after you remove their right to collect,Process,Export,or STORE, on contract cancelation Notice.

SurelyBonds is always a good read.

linked to in this thread
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...887-phorm.html

[OldBear]

Originally Posted by Deko

this on III

<snip>

Can't be right surely; the tests were done secretly to ensure customers knew nothing about it. Secret trials would not have invited anyone.

Looks like PR spin to me.

OB

[Wild Oscar]

Originally Posted by OldBear

Finally, Phorm story on Neowin's front page: http://www.neowin.net

And about time too .. I've posted about Phorm before on Neowin, but sadly people over there don't seem to be bothered too much!

Perhaps this will wake them up a bit ..

[popper]

Originally Posted by Horace

My contingency plan is to riing up VM and cancel. No web page needed.

If this gets implemented then VM along with Phorm don't give a hoot about legalities ergo you can forget about contracts and the OFT.

its up to you OC Horace, but you would be wise to make the effort and make sure you ALWAYS write that final Official "Notice" of termination AND send it registered post.


that WILL cover your bases when it comes to having proof that VM,BT or whoever, were intentionally placing bogus charges on your then non existant bill and forwarding its bogus data to the CRA's (a very dangerous place for them to be..).

that is sure to place these companys in the hot seat if you decide to have some fun with them in the SC courts.

see "moneyclaim" small claims site, and the CAG threads site.

---------- Post added at 19:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:18 ----------

Alexander and the gang, you might like to post a comment to
Lilian's (a very nice lady by all accounts)
"
panGloss

A UK-based cyberlaw blog by Lilian Edwards. Specialising in online privacy and security law, cybercrime, online intermediary law (including eBay and Google law), e-commerce, digital property and whatever captures my eye:-) Based at ILAWS, the INstitute for Law and the Web at Southampton
Blog.

it would be so benefitial to readers here to get a few more "personal [but Officially trained] views" from Lilian, and her fully trained peers, students etc
(Without prejudice etc OR a bill is to follow OC ), to help us on our way were possible and time permits.

most on my mind to be cleared up one way or the other is, how someone on a lower income might make a court "Injunction" against a named ISP Executive, Board room ,or Upper Manager (to make them personally and/or directly responsible for any DPI for profit law breaking they authorise etc)for instance......

is the small claims court system a real option to these people for instance....
http://blogscript.blogspot.com/2008/06/its-amazing.html

[markt50]

Hi,

I was off work today and a little bored, so I had another go at an anti Phorm video. It's just under 2 mins long so not as long as my last effort. Just thought I'd share

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vO3T...p;feature=user

[Privacy_Matters]

Originally Posted by popper

more than that Alexander, its a "Consumer Contract" and so comes under stricter rules that Always favour the End User in all things (Small Claims, County Court).

you can also be pritty sure (as Vm do all the time) that BT will forward any bogus "remainder of their 12/18 month contracts." to your friendly CRA (Experion,etc) credit file, each and every month without fail.

The most improtant thing to note, is that 3rd Party Organisations are only bought in to do the job that BT are perfectly capable of doing themselves. Thus creating a false debt with the 3rd Party.

The best thing to do, is to write to them and advise the 3rd Party Company that they are in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act...

... they will drop your case like a stone, and you will be left with BT, who will be left in a helpless position. And then you can start quoting your Statutory rights.....

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by markt50

Hi,

I was off work today and a little bored, so I had another go at an anti Phorm video. It's just under 2 mins long so not as long as my last effort. Just thought I'd share

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vO3T...p;feature=user

Very Good

You should add it to this YouTube Group:

https://nodpi.org/2008/06/02/youtube...etition-group/

Alexander Hanff

Originally Posted by OldBear

Can't be right surely; the tests were done secretly to ensure customers knew nothing about it. Secret trials would not have invited anyone.

Looks like PR spin to me.

OB

Not invites - just the pages

Post by Current User:

http://beta.bt.com/bta/forums/thread...rt=0&start=975

[BetBlowWhistler]

Originally Posted by markt50

Hi,

I was off work today and a little bored, so I had another go at an anti Phorm video. It's just under 2 mins long so not as long as my last effort. Just thought I'd share

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vO3T...p;feature=user

I liked it. Very ominous!

[OldBear]

Originally Posted by markt50

Hi,

I was off work today and a little bored, so I had another go at an anti Phorm video. It's just under 2 mins long so not as long as my last effort. Just thought I'd share

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vO3T...p;feature=user

That's excellent; makes Drayton's video look really amateurish.

These people know nothing about presentation.

Originally Posted by Paul Delaney

Not invites - just the pages

Post by Current User:

http://beta.bt.com/bta/forums/thread...rt=0&start=975

Got you; thanks for that, Paul.

[icsys]

Originally Posted by popper

Alexander and the gang, you might like to post a comment to
Lilian's (a very nice lady by all accounts)
"
panGloss

A UK-based cyberlaw blog by Lilian Edwards. Specialising in online privacy and security law, cybercrime, online intermediary law (including eBay and Google law), e-commerce, digital property and whatever captures my eye:-) Based at ILAWS, the INstitute for Law and the Web at Southampton
Blog.

it would be so benefitial to readers here to get a few more "personal [but Officially trained] views" from Lilian, and her fully trained peers, students etc
(Without prejudice etc OR a bill is to follow OC ), to help us on our way were possible and time permits.
http://blogscript.blogspot.com/2008/06/its-amazing.html

And whilst discussing mobile phone tracking in shopping centres she references Phorm too...

I think it's important here to seperate technophobic squeamishness from real privacy concerns. (This is also not like Phorm where anonymity had been artificially imposed and could easily be "broken". Here the mobile tracking system simply doesn't know your personal phone number or your name.)

[Deko]

ahh from BT betaforum webwise

WTF was this page that was seen ?

Re: BT Webwise Discussion Thread
Posted: Jun 18, 2008 6:33 PM in response to: Peter N Reply

I wish to make it clear to CableForum posters that this was not a Publicity Stunt

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...ail&id=4076014

At some time around 18 months to 2 years ago I was presented with a PageSense Invitation, which I immediately closed.

"If I had known the significance of this, I would have copied the data!"

This was probably because I always remove Cookies & other data on leaving my Browser & their system wanted to plant a "Cookie"??

Not everyone complains immediately BT, some take note of unusual occurrences & attempt to slowly form a picture of what is occurring!

[CWH]

Have just been re-reading Simon Watkin's presentation on fipr.org. No wonder we don't get anything from the Home Office: one of his suggestions is "Government to stand with Industry, on any Human Rights Challenge",and, "Need to Develop route for retention for all Crime....."

No wonder Phorm et al feel so invulnerable.

Colin