Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 135

OF1975 · 01-04-2008, 17:35

Alexander I submitted a petition too. Details are:

British Telecom have admitted to carrying out secret trials of the Phorm system in 2006 and 2007. Neither BT/Phorm obtained consent from those customers involved in the trials and therefore violated section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. This is an offence which can carry a sentence of up to 5 years in prison for each offence.

We request that the Prime Minister immediately order the Home Office and police to take steps to initiate a criminal prosecution of BT and Phorm for these offences.

************************************************** ****************

On the page where it said if you wanted to make a comment to the web team I also said:

Please note this petition is very distinct in substance from the current petition relating to Phorm which relates to future changes of privacy laws.

This petition, in contrast, is calling on the Prime Minister to act in order to enforce the current laws and ensure that BT and Phorm are prosecuted for past actions that contravened the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Refusal of this petition on grounds of duplication would be erroneous.

************************************************** ***************

Lets see what they do now. I arent giving up.

AlexanderHanff · 01-04-2008, 17:53

They already rejected my last one, I just resubmitted it again about 5 minutes ago. I have added comments to the Web Team to each one I have filed so far, they don't seem to be equipped with that ability which allows one to decipher strings of alphabetical characters into meaningful information; I think they call it "reading" or something.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:38 ----------

k nap time for me be back later

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:45 ----------

Before I go...

Wouldn't it be cool if we could organise some direct action along the following lines:

1. International No Web Day
A single day where in mass protest against privacy violations people don't use the web. Would cause the loss of millions in ad revenue.

2. International No Click Week
Where for an entire week in mass protest against privacy violations people don't click on ads on websites.

Just ideas

now I really must nap.

Alexander Hanff

OF1975 · 01-04-2008, 18:46

My petition was rejected not only the spurious grounds of "duplication" but also because in their words it is:

* Potentially libellous, false, or defamatory statements

To say I am angry is to understate things. I immediately fired off an email back to them pointing out that BT have themselves admitted to the trial last july and that they had no consent. I gave them links to the relevant articles and forcibly reminded them that BT executives are NOT above the law.

I will be resubmitting another petition in a few minutes time then going to watch channel 4 news and then the Manchester United V Roma match.

---------- Post added at 18:46 ---------- Previous post was at 18:30 ----------

OK another petition submitted which is smaller and a little gentler... added a few "potentially" and "may have contravened" etc etc What are you betting they reject it again still saying that its libelous etc

mark777 · 01-04-2008, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by OF1975

My petition was rejected not only the spurious grounds of "duplication" but also because in their words it is:

* Potentially libellous, false, or defamatory statements

To say I am angry is to understate things. I immediately fired off an email back to them pointing out that BT have themselves admitted to the trial last july and that they had no consent. I gave them links to the relevant articles and forcibly reminded them that BT executives are NOT above the law.

I will be resubmitting another petition in a few minutes time then going to watch channel 4 news and then the Manchester United V Roma match.

I've seen petitions regarding specific criminal cases rejected on the grounds that these should be specifically directed to the Home Office. This is in the last couple of days, and I don't know where this new Justice Ministry fits in. It might be worth a look around just to see if there are any contacts.

OF1975 · 01-04-2008, 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777

I've seen petitions regarding specific criminal cases rejected on the grounds that these should be specifically directed to the Home Office. This is in the last couple of days, and I don't know where this new Justice Ministry fits in. It might be worth a look around just to see if there are any contacts.

I could understand that if they were to reject it on the grounds it may prejudice any future legal proceedings etc but that isnt the reason they gave and the petition I submitted explicitly asked them to order the Home Office to investigate. Good idea about Ministry of Justice. Will look at that after watching the football match.

Be back later on....

mark777 · 01-04-2008, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by OF1975

Will look at that after watching the football match.

Be back later on....

Enjoy the game. Anyone told Phergie about Phorm?

---------- Post added at 19:20 ---------- Previous post was at 19:15 ----------

Found this straight away at the Ministry of Justice. Apologies if its been posted before. There is a link to contribute so a few e-mails may be in order.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/reviews/datasharing-intro.htm

JackSon · 01-04-2008, 21:12

The BBC jump on the band wagon - will Phorm be telling them that they are also being unethical?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7325451.stm

oblonsky · 01-04-2008, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by OF1975

My petition was rejected not only the spurious grounds of "duplication" but also because in their words it is:

* Potentially libellous, false, or defamatory statements

What about a petition calling for a judicial review? (is this the right terminology) of all data profiling at an ISP level, including Phorm, Xiam, NebuAd (currently US only) with a view to set out clear guidelines over what ISPs can and cannot do under RIPA and the DPA legislation. This should include advertising technologies, copyright infringement detection (see IRMA vs Eircom in Repulic of Ireland), DPI technologies for speed.

The problem though with a new petition is that it may "split the vote". Since petitions are only a gauage of public opinion and have no legal or parliamentary significance it could be argued it's best not to bother. Admittedly the new one could be better worded, or more specific, but I think we're probably better off just getting the current one as high as possible up the list, using it as an example of public opinion.

Check the BBC technology page. I think there'll be enough authoritative voices calling for BT to be strung up on this.

CaptJamieHunter · 01-04-2008, 21:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackSon

The BBC jump on the band wagon - will Phorm be telling them that they are also being unethical?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7325451.stm

Naturally it wouldn't have anything to do with the e-mail my chum sent to the BBC via Newswatch...

Love the comments from Nicholas Bohm...

"If the customers in 2006 and 2007 weren't invited to do anything and it was completely surreptitious, and assuming that BT and Phorm trialled a version of what they are planning to launch later this year, then it was a massive scale illegal interception."

Hell, the BBC actually posting something against Phorm and BT. Who'd have thought that?

JackSon · 01-04-2008, 21:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

Naturally it wouldn't have anything to do with the e-mail my chum sent to the BBC via Newswatch...

Of course not, which is why I didn't imply as such

roadrunner69 · 01-04-2008, 21:28

trouble is, the BBC story is still buried in the technology pages rather than on the main news page where an item of this magnitude belongs

mark777 · 01-04-2008, 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackSon

The BBC jump on the band wagon - will Phorm be telling them that they are also being unethical?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7325451.stm

Nice spot. We should ask the BBC to expand, even have a 'your say'?

If we all 'e-mail to a friend' from the BBC site, we could get this on the front page tonight as a 'most e-mailed'.

Anyone with accounts elsewhere cross post e.g. BT forum, The register etc.

CaptJamieHunter · 01-04-2008, 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777

Nice spot. We should ask the BBC to expand, even have a 'your say'?

If we all 'e-mail to a friend' we could get this on the front page tonight as a 'most e-mailed'.

Damn fine idea Sir

Doing it now

Don't forget to Digg, Reddit or Facebook the article if you have an account with them.

Cobbydaler · 01-04-2008, 21:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

Damn fine idea Sir

Doing it now

Don't forget to Digg, Reddit or Facebook the article if you have an account with them.

Or Stumbleupon...

mark777 · 01-04-2008, 22:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Here is a useful contact (amazing what some digging on the web can do):

VIRGIN MANAGEMENT LTD
Joshua Bayliss
120 CAMPDEN HILL ROAD, LONDON, W8 7AR
Department: Group General Counsel.

Position: Responsible for management of legal functions, advising senior executive committee and for VML's role in group-wide legal matters, principally acquisitions, disposals, JVs and other commercial contracts, and litigation. Also responsible for group company secretarial and intellectual property functions, and management of external legal panel.

E-mail: josh.bayliss@virgin.co.uk

Maybe we should be sending letters and phoning him since he is Virgin Group's General Counsel. I might give him a bell tomorrow once I finish my other chores

It is also a good example of just how anonymous anonymous data is. Ironic really.

Alexander Hanff

Josh, above is one of my new friends to 'e-mail a friend' from the BBC site.

Posted by Jackson ....

The BBC jump on the band wagon - will Phorm be telling them that they are also being unethical?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7325451.stm

E-mail your friends from the BBC site now to get it on the front page as 'most e-mailed'. Cross-post wherever you can.