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

[BadPhormula]

A long term Phorm investor and iii forum supporter of Phorm has decided to throw the towel in.

Carol and Son

brachaloch any evidence of this? This is useful info to me I make no apologies for making money off PHRM I watched it rise and caught it falling and correctly predicted the second peak in May.

I'm about to get out today because as the rabble have pointed out there are no trials and no were not stupid we have to balance risk. Only a small pf anyway, used to post on advfn before hammy any phormhaters took over. I think hammy is a secret phormhater.

As you can see even the pro-Phorm supporters think HamsterWheel is the ADVFN village idiot.

Btw, A new KFO entry has been added for HamsterWheel. It wasn't me who originally nominated him, and I never asked anyone to nominate him. If I was going to nominate someone like Hamsterwheel I would have made a generic nomination "Phorm Shills & Trolls" and mentioned Hamsterwheel as the prime candidate in the KFO Profile. However despite the fact I never nominated him I have now added my KFO vote and I'm sure other people here would like the opportunity to vent a bit of frustration in the form of a vote

The nID is 408




Note: Phorm needs a few more votes to clinch the #3 spot from Gordon Brown

[Wild Oscar]

Great work by icsys .. obviously too much spare time!!

Just had a thought about this .. it might be a good plan if the mods moved these summaries into kursk's sticky right at the top of the forum .. easily found then!!

[Tarquin L-Smythe]

HW KFO Guilty

[BadPhormula]

Originally Posted by Tarquin L-Smythe

HW KFO Guilty

LOL

Any clues on the KFO Profile description it hasn't been released yet?

Btw I'm in talks with someone (we know) about a FF plugin KFO auto-voter




update: Just a few more votes and HM gets onto the official Top 100 KFO list !ROFL!
h~~p://www.kindlyf~~~koff.co.uk/?action=view_nominee&nID=408

Phorm is officially #3 (c'mon folks you know it deserves #1 )


Well done that last HM voter give yourself a pat on the back, it's official he's in the 100 list!

[phormwatch]

Don't forget to 'Rate your ISP' at thinkbroadband:

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/rate.html

You might want to share your views on what you think about BT.

You have to register, unfortunately.

[AlexanderHanff]

Hey folks, sick as a dog at the moment will be back soon as I have recovered. Keep the pressure on.

Alexander Hanff

[BadPhormula]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Don't forget to 'Rate your ISP' at thinkbroadband:

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/rate.html

You might want to share your views on what you think about BT.

You have to register, unfortunately.

I rated my BT telephone service yesterday when a sales rep phoned up to offer me a great deal. I politely said "no thanks, not interested" before he got his sale pitch upto speed. He was taken aback... he started on his second wind,
"free evening and weekend calls"... !splutter!! splutter!#

"Oi!, I said NO!"... pregnant pause, building up to punch line.

"I'm cancelling my line... and going with another LLU provider, one that doesn't wiretap its customers!"

Hangs up!

Starts smiling to self... as I imagine BT's business starting to take a nose dive when more and more customers pull the BT plug and sign up with other telephone line operators.

Isn't local loop unbundling great!?

Only £2 to transfer your line to another operator!

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Hey folks, sick as a dog at the moment will be back soon as I have recovered. Keep the pressure on.

Alexander Hanff

I hope you have not been bumping any Russian speaking gentlemen in London coffee bars. (polonium-210)

[icsys]

Originally Posted by warescouse

Armed with the initial FOI request scans by Dephormation and when we have fully consumed the interesting information contained within, we should consolidate ideas for our next best move or plan of attack so to speak.

We should attempt to ensure that further requests are precisely worded to fill any missing gaps that have come to light after the last disclosures. The more loose ends we can tie up the better we can fight this illegal WebWise interception.

It is fairly obvious the Phorm and Kent are doing the rounds, so to speak, with the influential community and it is up to us to ensure that our counter claims are well targeted.

Knowledge is power as Kent would like to think and although we are doing a great job I still think we are playing catch up. There is probably about 98% of the population still to educate. Unless Phorm and BT get hit by one of the Big Boys (please, please) who object to Phorm illegaly creaming off their own legal cake we must ensure we do not sit back and pat ourselves on the back just yet.

I have just received a response from my MP regarding Phorm. My enquiry was forwarded to BERR and the response received was from Shriti Vadera of BERR.

The letter explained that ISP's have announced plans to track internet activity using phorm's Webwise and OIX products. It continued to explain that phorm replaces ads with ones relevant to the customer's web browsing meaning less irrelevant ads. (Standard info - nothing new).

She went on to say that she was aware that some ISP customers have voiced concerns about disclosure to third parties about their web browsing and said she understood those concerns. She also stated that the Government is committed to ensuring that peoples privacy is fully protected and that we have legislation in place for this purpose and consequently the ICO has been looking at the proposals to ensure that any use of phorm is compatible with the relevant privacy legislation. With the letter was a printed copy of the ICO view from the ICO website.

She went on to say that the Home Office had advised Phorm on how the use of phorm might be affected by RIPA. She also stated that both the ICO and herself had discussed details of the upcoming trial with BT and seems satisfied that BT's confirmation that customers' web browsing will only be monitored and ads delivered if they opt-in to the trial.


In light of information that is appearing in the online press and the FoI documents, I wonder if she really does understand the concerns and if this Government really is committed to protecting privacy.

With reference to Phorm's document titled 'Phorm informed consent update', a sentence in the document reads: 'Since Phorm technology does not use IP addresses to target advertising there is a strong argument that section 7 of PECR does not apply'.

It is easy now to see why Phorm continually state that the Home Office and ICO are comfortable with webwise, they are both quoting different sets of legislation. A bit like madslug's arson versus theft analogy.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by icsys

I have just received a response from my MP regarding Phorm. My enquiry was forwarded to BERR and the response received was from Shriti Vadera of BERR.

I've had broadly the same letter. Shriti Vadera doesn't acknowledge the content creators rights, or the service side consent for interception. Which is surprising for the department for Business Enterprise Regulatory Reform, who you'd expect to comprehend the economic impact of parasites like Phorm on legitimate content creators and eCommerce.

I also had a letter from Patricia Hewitt (BT non exec director and MP) repeating almost verbatim Emma Sanderson's drivvel about extensive legal advice. (I wrote back, telling Ms Hewitt I thought it would be entertaining to read that advice if only BT would publish it, given what I've read of the ICO documentation, and Home Office advice).

Its getting more and more obvious to me with every new revelation the government are desperately trying to white wash this criminal shambles, presumably to protect someone senior in Labour, or a big donor, or some government department from deep embarrassment. The bit I can't work out is why the opposition parties aren't ripping them to shreds over this. Don Foster in particular has been very quiet lately.

July will be a very interesting month I'm sure.

[roadrunner69]

Originally Posted by icsys

I have just received a response from my MP regarding Phorm. My enquiry was forwarded to BERR and the response received was from Shriti Vadera of BERR.

I had a virtually identical letter last week from Ms Vadera as have, I believe, a couple of other people on this thread.

I just don't think she gets why people are so angry about this. She seems to have fallen for the standard 'BT/phorm has assured us...' blah blah
I don't normally go for the big conspiracy theory thing but....I'm starting to have second thoughts on this.
Wake up and smell the coffee Ms Vadera..before the brown stuff engages with the rotating windy thingy.

I agree Pete, July promises to be a very interesting month.

[Dephormation]

On a different note, I've done some number crunching on the BT Transactions in own shares, to see where they might be aiming for on 16 July.

It looks like they might be buying up their own shares, then cancelling them (see 19 June) to make earnings per share look better perhaps? And/or improving their ability to resist a shareholder revolt.

Use the info at your own risk. Buy/sell on the basis of this data and you will get what you deserve in spades. A share tip? Buy SSL certificate authority shares, at your own risk.

[Paddy1]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

Its getting more and more obvious to me with every new revelation the government are desperately trying to white wash this criminal shambles, presumably to protect someone senior in Labour, or a big donor, or some government department from deep embarrassment. The bit I can't work out is why the opposition parties aren't ripping them to shreds over this. Don Foster in particular has been very quiet lately.

Call me paranoid but maybe they actually want the ability to snoop on peoples internet usage without all that tedious having to push it through parliament and have it splashed all over the papers nonsense.

[icsys]

Originally Posted by Paddy1

Call me paranoid but maybe they actually want the ability to snoop on peoples internet usage without all that tedious having to push it through parliament and have it splashed all over the papers nonsense.

Here's my conspiracy theory...

The Home Office want ISP's to monitor web-traffic 'in the interests of security'. However the ISP's have said they can't or won't do this. "We are mere conduits!"
Phorm says, I can monitor all web traffic and give a cash incentive to the ISP's for the interception of their customers.
Phorm, ISP and HO join forces...
The Home Office gets what they want, the ISP gets a cash boost, Phorm makes a tidy profit.
Everyone is happy... well everyone except Joe Public. (Are you still with us Joe?)

Could this be why the ICO and Home Office are refusing to step on BT's toes?

[popper]

#3 well, i am using the OT BR thread at least