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

[SimonHickling]

Another vote for academic / technical breach of copyright

Hi Simon,
Strictly speaking there's an argument that a system like Phorm infringes copyright by copying and analysing pages for the purpose of serving ads elsewhere. In reality, I can't see site operators doing anything about that. I doubt we would be bothered by such use. The infringement argument strikes me as an academic, technical one. You have probably read this argument already, though, if you read my editorial on Phorm (http://www.out-law.com/page-9090).

Regards,

[redacted]



From: Simon Hickling [redacted]
Sent: 13 July 2008 00:55
To: [redacted]@out-law.com
Subject: Copyright Notice



Hi,

I have been looking at some of the articles on your site and found them most informative and useful, thank you.

I am interested in your copyright notice and wondered how it would fit in with the Phorm/Webwise system currently being considered by BT, Talk Talk and Virgin Media? Given that this system uses a copy of the content as transmitted in order to provide targeted advertising, my understanding of both their system and the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulation 2002, suggests that it would be illegal for them to profile your site content for commercial gain? They could also be treated as a publisher of that information, but would not include any specific disclaimers regarding legal advice.

I would be interested in your opinion if you are in a position to give it. If you cannot could you please let me know?

Again thanks for an informative site.

Regards

Simon Hickling


PS I would welcome the opportunity to pass any reply on to others with similar interests via the forum at cableforum.co.uk. I f you would prefer me not to please let me know in your reply. Anything posted will NOT include any identifying data about yourself.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by SimonHickling

Another vote for academic / technical breach of copyright

That bit in bold. That is factually wrong. More factually wrong than the statement "Elvis lives!".

More wrong than you could possibly ever be wrong.

And perhaps I may be able prove it soon, with a little help from a friend.

[Deko]

From

http://www.samknows.com/broadband/ne...ition-400.html

"The system works by giving those who opt-in a number, we never know who they are, we store no personally identifiable information," he says.

Finally opt-in model confirmed by Kent. Thats got to hurt.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Deko

From

http://www.samknows.com/broadband/ne...ition-400.html



Finally opt-in model confirmed by Kent. Thats got to hurt.

No the system is still very much Opt-Out he is just being very careful to avoid using the words Opt-Out. If you read the updates to their web site he completely obfuscates the matter of opt-in/opt-out to try and remove focus from it.

Alexander Hanff

[Dephormation]

As posted to NoDPI, London Stock Exchange is showing a small sale of PHRX stock today at a 12 month low price (£12.83)

PHRX is the unrestricted stock.

09:43:26 15-Jul-2008, £12.83.33, 150, £1,925.00, Ordinary Trade

[AlexanderHanff]

OK I need someone to volunteer to send out a press release, I was going to do it myself but I am just completely overloaded with thing to do in time for tomorrow morning, so if someone can take this task off my hands it would be very much appreciated.

It needs to go to as many press/media newsrooms as possible including online press. Madslug has been working on a list of contacts if you contact her I am sure she would be happy to pass them on to you.

Ideally this needs to go out within the next 2 hours at the latest. Unfortunately I have been running around all day sorting out printing issues, getting the generator for the speeches and a whole bunch of other things. It looks like our original printer has let us down (no contact in the last 2 days and I was supposed to be going to Manchester to pick them up this morning) so I have had to organise printing from elsewhere at the last minute which is unfortunately taking up all my time at the moment.

Please let me know if you are going to take on the press release job so I know it is being dealt with.

Thanks

Alexander Hanff

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

No the system is still very much Opt-Out he is just being very careful to avoid using the words Opt-Out. If you read the updates to their web site he completely obfuscates the matter of opt-in/opt-out to try and remove focus from it.

Alexander Hanff

I'll back that comment. BT have also, even following the ICO, consistently and continuously FAILED to change their official public stance on opt-in/opt-out/not opted-in etc. for the Phorm product. As far as I can see, the trial is definitely opt-IN (with technical holes) but the final product is anyone's guess - they are not publicly committed to obeying the ICO's requirement for Opt-IN.

They have simply said - the phorm/webwise TRIAL will be "opt-IN" but then declined to discuss the cookie arrangements except to say that if you are opted in then block the relevant domains, you will be unable to browse. That's on record.

I suspect they don't want the issue discussed in any way, because of course it impacts on the legality/illegality arguments about their covert trials which were of course, no opt-in/out at all. So while they are worrying about the police knocking at the door, they can't really afford to publicly backtrack and accept the legal requirement that legality requires informed consent and opt-IN.

They have also refused to clarify what tracking/profiling/ is done on those who NEVER opt-in to the trial (they use obfuscated language that APPEARS to say that they don't touch you - but the argument has enough wriggle room for a Routemaster to get through sideways).

They also are very careful to use vague words with no clear technical definition for the activity of intercepting/tracking/profiling/copying. You can never work out exactly what they mean. They will never say what packets go where in an unambiguous clear sentence.

They BT - have also said they are "working on" a cookie free system for opting in/out for the possible final rollout, and have never answered any technical questions on the topic.

They have also been very careful to use vague hard to define language whenever talking about opt-in/out/not opt-in/choice - as slippery as a bowl of spilt custard on top of a floor covered in diesel oil.

As always - its the questions they WON'T answer and the things they DON'T say, that give the game away.

[Privacy_Matters]

I have sent a short Press Release to Regional Newspapers and Radio Stations in Scotland.

The Press release can be viewed on the badphorm Blog:

http://www.badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugi...als.php?blog.2

---------- Post added at 15:57 ---------- Previous post was at 15:44 ----------

Can anyone help compile Regional lists of Newspapers, Radio and TV Stations please.

[Florence]

Sent the press release to Manchester evening news

[Wildie]

el reg today http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07...annual_report/
not sure if it old or posted before
full report i think here http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documen...rt_2007_08.pdf

[serial]

Also everyone going should have a look at this pic (click to zoom):


Look from the bottom left, you see the metal studs in the ground. This marks the seperation of Barbican(private) land and public land.

No protesting on the Barbican side of this line.

For pics of the protest site see:

http://badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugins/f...topic.php?7287

http://forums.pcw.co.uk/thread.jspa?...39246&tstart=0

Hank

[AlexanderHanff]

About to start the Security Now podcast, hit http://twitlive.tv to see the podcast recorded live and interact via their chat room.

Alexander Hanff

[Deko]

Good luck Alex, see you tommorow around 12 ish.

[JackSon]

Good luck Alex - will grab the mp3 of the cast later, the live feed is lagging/stuttering something fierce. Am sure someone will be kind enough to link it once available