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

[Pasanonic]

I agree with the Captain here. Let us be as informed as we possibly can be at all times, let us debate but not allow blind passion to render our opinions invalid due to being seen as fanatical conspiracy theorists.
let us all continue to collect and report as much information as we can and let us then have those who are academically best able to collect that data and make it useful to our side of the debate and have the people who are best able to put forward that debate in a clear and level-headed manner take on that side of things. Be that they may or may not be the same people.

Thanks for the welcome Alexander.

I read your current draft of the paper you are producing and I am greatly impressed. It's good that we have someone with as much knowledge as yourself in the area who is prepared to put in the time for such things.
The paper has highlighted many things for me but not least that if we have a home office that can wash its hands of this issue and let it carry on regardless in light of such evidence then we clearly have a major problem with the UK which does not just sit with the incumbent government but UK law itself.

I understand that you will be attending the meeting? I have work that will prevent me from attending (more security this time involving airports and cargo ) but when I heard you might not go I was seriously considering trying to arrange someone to take you.



I'll look forward to more.

Craig.

[unicus]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

The companies I've worked for have never gone out and funded any assessments, discovery reports, etc without first being pretty confident of what they're going to get as the end product (ie: no nasty surprises or critical content in the final document).

This is a tactic used by most companies - keep the remit of the report tight to avoid the unwanted. Phorm though have an arrogance the likes of which you don't see too often, so what is exactly the remit for this report? Have they kept their remit tight? And also is this a fixed fee regardless?

I await the report but carry on the fight regardless.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by Kursk

I think you'll find that it is not a legal requirement to undertake a PIA and is not a 'necessary' part of the process but an 'advisable' one. For example, you might use it to illustrate 'openness'. If you feel a process that is being bought by 'the other side' to be of value, fair enough. I don't.

You're right; it's not a legal requirement, but it is an integral part of the "due process" and so Phorm were always going to undertake a PIA so that they could claim to have conducted "all due diligence". That being the case, I would much prefer the PIA to be undertaken by an organisation/individual with links to successful privacy campaigning than by a fly-by-night outfit I'd never heard of. I think the chances of Phorm getting the report 100% their way is much reduced that way, don't you? [again: pragmatism, not idealism]

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

I agree with the Captain here. Let us be as informed as we possibly can be at all times, let us debate but not allow blind passion to render our opinions invalid due to being seen as fanatical conspiracy theorists.
let us all continue to collect and report as much information as we can and let us then have those who are academically best able to collect that data and make it useful to our side of the debate and have the people who are best able to put forward that debate in a clear and level-headed manner take on that side of things. Be that they may or may not be the same people.

Thanks for the welcome Alexander.

I read your current draft of the paper you are producing and I am greatly impressed. It's good that we have someone with as much knowledge as yourself in the area who is prepared to put in the time for such things.
The paper has highlighted many things for me but not least that if we have a home office that can wash its hands of this issue and let it carry on regardless in light of such evidence then we clearly have a major problem with the UK which does not just sit with the incumbent government but UK law itself.

I understand that you will be attending the meeting? I have work that will prevent me from attending (more security this time involving airports and cargo ) but when I heard you might not go I was seriously considering trying to arrange someone to take you.



I'll look forward to more.

Craig.

Yes I will be at meeting traffic permitting. I have a lecture until 1pm during which I have to give a presentation on the Human Rights Abuses at Guantanamo Bay, so I can't miss it; which means I will only have approx 5 hours to get there from Lancaster. I just hope I make it in time.

As for my paper, I did promise to finish it yesterday and I am disappointed with myself for having not done so. But, I decided I needed to spend some quality time with my family this weekend and to be honest I was feeling a little burnt out, so I took some time away from the keyboard. It is hard not to get emotional over such issues and whereas I agree emotions should not be permitted to get out of control, it is important that we make people emotional in order to finally make them stop and think about what these issues mean with regards to their own and their families' futures.

Alexander Hanff

[Pasanonic]

I wish you luck with that then Alexander.
I expect you will make it.
I once made it from Manchester to Hammersmith in 2 hours 11 minute on a Friday evening for an extremely important meeting. It was with a lady though, so you take your time


I do so wish that Simon had answered my questions before going. He prompted me to finally register.

[dav]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Yes I will be at meeting traffic permitting. I have a lecture until 1pm during which I have to give a presentation on the Human Rights Abuses at Guantanamo Bay, so I can't miss it; which means I will only have approx 5 hours to get there from Lancaster. I just hope I make it in time.

Alexander Hanff

That's going to be a close run thing. I have to say that I don't think you'll get there for the start. Good luck though. If anyone should be there, it should be you.

EDIT: Crikey Pasanonic! That's going some.
I was talking about safe and legal speed limits. Although I did once make it from Portsmouth to Sheffield in 3hrs.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by lucevans

You're right; it's not a legal requirement, but it is an integral part of the "due process" and so Phorm were always going to undertake a PIA so that they could claim to have conducted "all due diligence". That being the case, I would much prefer the PIA to be undertaken by an organisation/individual with links to successful privacy campaigning than by a fly-by-night outfit I'd never heard of. I think the chances of Phorm getting the report 100% their way is much reduced that way, don't you? [again: pragmatism, not idealism]

I have never heard of 80/20 Thinking, a Company that has existed for only just over 3 months and, as such, they have no record of successful privacy campaigning. What do you know about them apart from what they have told you?

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by dav

/snip

EDIT: Crikey Pasanonic! That's going some.
I was talking about safe and legal speed limits. Although I did once make it from Portsmouth to Sheffield in 3hrs.

She was a very lovely lady who I later married

Originally Posted by Kursk

I have never heard of 80/20 Thinking, a Company that has existed for only just over 3 months and, as such, they have no record of successful privacy campaigning. What do you know about them apart from what they have told you?

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo..._on_phorm.html

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by Kursk

I have never heard of 80/20 Thinking, a Company that has existed for only just over 3 months and, as such, they have no record of successful privacy campaigning. What do you know about them apart from what they have told you?

I know that that it was established by a founder and a senior research fellow of Privacy International, an organisation with a considerable body of work, which I have been following since 1997.
Unless these individuals have suddenly had a change of heart and gone over to the "dark side" I am reasonably confident that I understand their values and what they stand for.

Yourself?

---------- Post added at 16:34 ---------- Previous post was at 16:32 ----------

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

She was a very lovely lady who I later married

Awwwww

[Bonglet]

Can i ask what role 80/20 thinking's advisory group has on this matter and if they have any input on the reccomendation yourself as a group put forward regarding phorm just that on your website you seem to employ Ray Stanton Global Head of Business Continuity, Security & Governance, BT plc so any arm twisting or nudges in the right direction as far as bt are concerned ( i wont mention bonuses or cash incentives to emplyee's) are already in place imo.

Murky world we seem to live in more you dive the muddier the water gets ill do some more searching on history of people and stuff see what i can dig out .

I hope phorms pr team has nothing to do with or be linked to burson marsteller a sister or parent company you have as this could just be seen as another peice of the phorm pr jigsaw and nothing to do with privacy rights or consumer interests.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Bonglet

Can i ask what role 80/20 thinking's advisory group has on this matter and if they have any input on the reccomendation yourself as a group put forward regarding phorm just that on your website you seem to employ Ray Stanton Global Head of Business Continuity, Security & Governance, BT plc so any arm twisting or nudges in the right direction as far as bt are concerned ( i wont mention bonuses or cash incentives to emplyee's) are already in place imo.

Murky world we seem to live in more you dive the muddier the water gets ill do some more searching on history of people and stuff see what i can dig out .

I would be interested in finding any information about government officials with regards to share holdings in any of the three ISPs involved in this scandal. It seems to me and many others, that the government are not acting appropriately or in accordance with the laws of the land on this issue (see PM web team blocking petitions, Home Office refusing to take action, ICO releasing a seriously erroneous Public Statement which it had to amend several days later, lack of answers to questions issued by politicians and lords; to name just a few).

Transparency seems to have garnished a new definition in light of the current debate.

Alexander Hanff

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Transparency seems to have garnished a new definition in light of the current debate.

Alexander Hanff

Would that be transparency as in "I can see right through you"?

---------- Post added at 16:59 ---------- Previous post was at 16:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Bonglet

Can i ask what role 80/20 thinking's advisory group has on this matter and if they have any input on the reccomendation yourself as a group put forward regarding phorm just that on your website you seem to employ Ray Stanton Global Head of Business Continuity, Security & Governance, BT plc so any arm twisting or nudges in the right direction as far as bt are concerned ( i wont mention bonuses or cash incentives to emplyee's) are already in place imo.

Murky world we seem to live in more you dive the muddier the water gets ill do some more searching on history of people and stuff see what i can dig out .

I hope phorms pr team has nothing to do with or be linked to burson marsteller a sister or parent company you have as this could just be seen as another peice of the phorm pr jigsaw and nothing to do with privacy rights or consumer interests.

I'm no apologist for 80/20 Thinking, but if you're going to list members of the Advisory Group, don't forget The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Northesk - who has been one of the most vocal parliamentary opponents to Phorm to date.

Originally Posted by Bonglet

I hope phorms pr team has nothing to do with or be linked to burson marsteller a sister or parent company you have as this could just be seen as another peice of the phorm pr jigsaw and nothing to do with privacy rights or consumer interests.

Now that IS worrying.

http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=392

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burson-Marsteller

and from 80/20's web site

80/20's UK strategic partner is the global PR firm Burson-Marsteller. B-M and 80/20 will be working closely together to build networks and create projects and events that address key privacy and security issues.

[Pasanonic]

I have not researched anything on here Alexander but feel free to wade through it if you feel there may be something of value.

http://www.publications.parliament.u...m/cmregmem.htm