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

[Florence]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

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

Or a desperate attempt to get it up and running before it could be stopped.

[jelv]

Originally Posted by Florence

Or a desperate attempt to get it up and running before it could be stopped.

That was exactly my thought!

Originally Posted by Florence

See they didn't reply again seems phormukprteam have been downgraded to spy of the year...

phormukprteam might want to change their user ID?

To: phormukpteam (no 'r')?

Because they are just Public now, no Relations with the public, just Public.

[Florence]

Just had a second reply from Amazon thye are now going to investigate phorm and what phorm does before replying to me again... I will let you know what happens but have replied thanking them and added in that I had planned to boycot all companies that use the phormadvertising platform.

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by dav

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.

Given that Phorm and BT have continually refused, despite my public challenges here an on El Reg, to publish the full legal opinions they claim to have received including the full details of the QC who provided this advice, one has to ask if this "letter of comfort"** was all that they actually had?

So yet again I challenge Phorm to provide the full QC opinion, including date and time of original issue and the details of the QC who provided it. No spin or interpretation needed thank you, just the full QC opinion. There are people here who can and will provide suitable interpretation.

It's not difficult.

The HO had little choice other than to admit that the "letter of comfort" did not qualify as legal opinion given that Nicholas Bohm has already reminded them that the courts decide on what is and isn't legal under the law.

They still have not answered why they have done nothing to investigate the secret trials. Time to write to my MP again...

**It's a bit different to the kind of thing I would regard as a letter of comfort... Something like

"Dear CaptHunter, I'm happy to confirm to you that the story about Sky One remaking Blake's 7 is in fact nothing more than a complete fabrication and we will not, in fact, be going ahead with any such production." would be very comforting right now.

OK, who thought it was going to be something very different? *grin*

Well I finally read all of Nicholas Bohm's paper today - The Phorm "Webwise" System - a Legal Analysis.

It's a masterpiece of well phormed understanding!

The only bit I really did not understand (maybe someone can help me here) is in para. 37, "The authorisation of interception is hedged about with safeguards". I really cannot comprehend the meaning of that sentence. Believe me, I tried to today. Is this 'hedged about' meaning 'surrounded by'? Maybe I need a vino and it will become clear!

Hank

[CaptJamieHunter]

Letter written to Neil Berkett. Includes Nicholas Bohm's legal analysis and letter to the Home Office...

"This second document may seem spurious as far as Virgin Media is concerned. However, given the secret testing of this technology by BT in 2006 and 2007, questions are now being asked as to whether Virgin Media have ever tested any of Phorm's technology or any similar technology.

I must now ask for your written assurance that no such tests have been undertaken and that if any are to be undertaken then all customers will be informed by letter as well as e-mail clearly stating such tests are occurring and offered an opt-out which is network based and will prevent any data going to Phorm's systems. This is important to me and many other customers – if you cannot provide such an assurance then customers will perceive that Virgin Media is no better than BT. Customers will then want to know who was affected by such a trial and, as you will see from Mr Bohm's analysis, Virgin Media will be open to legal action."


In other words, thanks for the phone calls but this time I'd rather like it in writing. I've pointed him to the meeting footage too.

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by Hank

Well I finally read all of Nicholas Bohm's paper today - The Phorm "Webwise" System - a Legal Analysis.

It's a masterpiece of well phormed understanding!

The only bit I really did not understand (maybe someone can help me here) is in para. 37, "The authorisation of interception is hedged about with safeguards". I really cannot comprehend the meaning of that sentence. Believe me, I tried to today. Is this 'hedged about' meaning 'surrounded by'? Maybe I need a vino and it will become clear!

Hank

Hedging can have many uses in language but in this case I think it merely states ( not having taken it in context ) that the authorisation is not easy to obtain being protected ( hedged about ) by safeguards.

Thanks Panasonic - that fits I think.

Email sent to my MP, follow up to letter she has already replied to, link to N Bhhm's paper, Early Day Motion and summary of the latest. Asked if she will sign the EDM and expressed concern about the police/HO/ICO etc

Damn, then I saw Alexander's idea about complaining in line with the procedures required leading up to a complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. It'll save... I'll no doubt be writing another in a week or so!

Hank

[Florence]

Had to visit my online banking today so decided to browse the pages I never visit..

privacy and cookie policy
personal information

First of all, we do not collect any personally identifiable information from people entering the 'public' areas of our site. (That's the ones that you can surf and look around without need for a password). All we do is gather information on the numbers of visitors to certain areas of the site and about the places in the UK that visitors access us from. (Be assured that we will never attempt to use this information to identify specific individuals. We aren't Big Brother you know).

Once you register to use the password-protected areas of the site, it's a different matter. We will then ask you for personal information about yourself. Of course, we don't bandy this information about - we will tell you how we may use your information when you become a customer so there won't be any surprises and in processing your details we comply with the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Banking Code. You'll find more about these in site terms.
cookies

Our public website and Internet Banking service, along with most other major websites, use cookies. Cookies are pieces of information that a website transfers to the cookie file on your computer's hard disk. Cookies enable users to navigate around the website and (where appropriate) enable us to tailor the content to fit the needs of visitors who have accessed the site.

We use two types of cookie on our websites.
session cookies which are temporary cookies which remain in the cookie file of your computer until you close your browser at which point they are deleted
persistent or stored cookies that remain permanently on the cookie file of your computer.

Cookies cannot look into your computer and obtain information about you or your family or read any material kept on your hard drive and unless you have logged onto Internet Banking, cookies cannot be used to identify who you are.

Cookies cannot be used by anyone else who has access to the computer to find out anything about you, other than the fact that someone using the computer has visited a certain website. Cookies do not in any way compromise the security of Internet Banking.

Cookies will not be used to contact you for marketing purposes other than by means of advertisements offered within the Internet Banking website.

Cookies may be used to record details of pages relating to particular products and services that you have visited on our websites. This is to provide us with generic usage statistics to allow us to improve our websites and to provide you with information about products and services that may interest you. Information on products and services may be provided via the website or by other means.

This does not affect your right to opt-out from receiving marketing material from us.

The web-browsers of most computers are initially set up to accept cookies. If you prefer, you can set your web-browser to disable cookies or to inform you when a website is attempting to add a cookie. You can also delete cookies that have previously been added to your computer's cookie file.

You can set your browser to disable persistent cookies and/or session cookies but if you disable session cookies, although you will be able to view our public unsecured website you will not be able to log onto Internet Banking.

If the computer that you are using is set to disable persistent cookies, you will be able to access Internet Banking; however, your navigation of the website may be less enjoyable.
third party cookies

In order to develop our website in line with customer needs first direct is working with WebTrends to track usage on our website. WebTrends provide first direct with statistics to show us which pages on our website are visited most frequently and how long visitors spend on our site. We use this information to help us plan how we should improve the site.

WebTrends uses a cookie to track the number of unique users of the site. It basically tells us whether we have a small number of regular visitors to the site or a large number of infrequent visitors. None of the information can be traced to an individual - we do not know who you are as a unique user, merely that there are a certain number of people using the site. The cookie only relates to what goes on in the first direct site and the information cannot be used for marketing on an individual basis. You should refer to the WebTrends On Demand Privacy Policy to learn how they collect and use information. You can find WebTrends On Demand Privacy Policy at https://ondemand.webtrends.com/privacypolicy.asp

In addition to WebTrends we also use Touch Clarity to optimise and track click-throughs on our banners. Further information on Touch Clarity's privacy policy can be found at http://www.touchclarity.com/privacy/client-policy.php

first direct also tracks customers that come to us via our advertising campaigns using Atlas tags. Atlas is a cookie-based company that obtains generic information. They are not used to obtain information about specific users. You can find out more about Atlas and their privacy policy, by visiting http://www.atlassolutions.co.uk
web beacons and spotlight tags

first direct web pages including Internet Banking may contain electronic images, known as web beacons or spotlight tags. These enable first direct to count users who have visited certain pages on our website. Web beacons and spotlight tags are simply tools used to obtain generic information about the web pages visited. They are not used to obtain information about specific users.
how to manage cookies

Please visit http://www.allaboutcookies.org/manage-cookies/ to discover how to disable and delete cookies.

Some links on this page may allow you to access non-HSBC websites. first direct has no control over the linked websites and is not liable for your use of them.

Just wonder what sort of mess the Phorm addition to the cookies would do....

In case this has not been posted already

http://www.capmarkets.com/ViewFile.a...HRM_230408.pdf

and in particular

"And

third, the launch customers – BT, Carphone Warehouse and Virgin Media – have
also undergone extensive trialling of the technology, and none are in the business of

taking unnecessary risks on new technology adoption."

[Bonglet]

Here we go damn good stuff

And third, the launch customers – BT, Carphone Warehouse and Virgin Media – have
also undergone extensive trialling of the technology, and none are in the business of
taking unnecessary risks on new technology adoption.

so phorm are admitting themselves that all these companies have done trials
i belive now 95% that i was under some sort of trial, last year.

[jelv]

Another quote from the same:

We also note TalkTalk’s stated intention to launch its service on an ‘opt in’ basis – although this may change once initial trial results become known.

i.e. Phorm know opt in would damage the business model and intend to revert to opt out once the current storm has died down.

[vicz]

Hmm full of the usual spin and half-truths. Also little mention of 121media, spyware or rootkits in the CVs (surprise!). Anyone investing their hard-earned on the basis of this deserves all they get. Anyone subscribing to Charles Stanley needs to seriously question if they are getting value for money if this is typical of the quality of their work

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by Bonglet

Here we go damn good stuff

And third, the launch customers – BT, Carphone Warehouse and Virgin Media – have
also undergone extensive trialling of the technology, and none are in the business of
taking unnecessary risks on new technology adoption.

so phorm are admitting themselves that all these companies have done trials
i belive now 95% that i was under some sort of trial, last year.

Well let's see what Neil Berkett has to say about this. Someone's telling porkies somewhere.

Note that this document states that

"This research has not been prepared in accordance with regulatory requirements designed to promote the independence of
investment research."

So it admits (albeit in small print) that it's just a piece of promotional spin garbage.

And also that it quotes the very advice that the Home Office is now standing off from.

Lots of spin but precious little fact. Keep alerting people to the spin-free facts and they will be persuaded that Phorm is something we can all live without.

The sooner BT gets its sorry backside dragged through the courts the better.

What was it Bill Hicks said about people who work in marketing and advertising?