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

[feesch]

Originally Posted by number6

This is still looking at it from the advertisers view. It's not about advertising. It's about the interception of private communications for commercial purposes without the informed consent of both parties. That is totally unacceptable whether it is post, telephone, TV or internet.

Commercial is either license or advertising, that was my point. Again did not say I agreed, merley that was their intention - and from studies I have seen users would be accepting of any model that was cheaper for them in long run.

Judging by by 10MM who signed upto Oystercard, I wonder if the mass number of people would choose convenience over being spied on - or could even make the connection? To illustrate a different spyware operation.

Also, do you not think web and personal are antithesis?

[pseudonym]

Originally Posted by feesch

Agreed! DO I agree with Police having access to little black boxes at ISP level, What about your boss monitoring what goes on via your exchange server? So you look at something online, against company rules, and you get sacked. How would that stand in court? That is generally the thrust of that argument.

There's a vast difference between the police lawfully monitoring communications in the investigation of suspected criminal activity or even an employer monitoring his employee's use of the company connection, and a private company monitoring your own paid for private connection for financial gain.


What about BT employees, I understand that they get free BT connections as a perk. So unless BT specifically exclude their employees' broadband connections from passing through a Phorm DPI device, then their employer will effectively be monitoring their private communications even when they are at home - If I was a BT employee, I'd either be talking to the union to get employees lines excluded from phorm's DPI devices or moving my ADSL to another provider.

The topic is Phorm and how to prevent it's use.The discussion is not about digital tv and tv ads.

Anyone who cannot accept this had better cease posting unless they can stick to the topic.

Thank you.

[feesch]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

That's great, feesch, but I see you studiously avoided answering the questions.

Here is a 'reminder' of what PeopleOnPage is, and its behavour:

"121media, the former name of Phorm, has had its products described as spyware.[9] As 121Media it distributed a program called PeopleOnPage[10], which was classified as spyware by F-Secure.[11] PeopleOnPage was an application built around their advertising engine called ContextPlus. ContextPlus was also distributed as a root kit called Apropos[10][12], which used tricks to prevent the user from removing the application and sent information back to central servers regarding a user's browsing habits.[13]

In November 2005 the Center for Democracy and Technology in the US filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission over distribution of what it considered spyware, including ContextPlus. They stated that they had investigated and uncovered deceptive and unfair behaviour. This complaint was filed in concert with the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Internet Center, a group that was filing a similar complaint against Integrated Search Technologies with Canadian authorities.[14]

In May 2006 ContextPlus shut down its operations and stated "[Contextplus are] no longer able to ensure the highest standards of quality and customer care". The shutdown came after several major lawsuits against adware vendors had been launched.[15] Phorm has countered this with an admission of a company history in adware and the closing down of a multi-million dollar revenue stream as people confused adware with spyware.[13]"

Is it really 'difficult' for you to see that 'deceptive and unfair behaviour' of software classified by anti-virus vendors as 'Spyware' is unethical?

>Ok, the second issue something I often discuss in my presentations. What web 2.0 has done (starting with ratings/reviews by Amazon) is given the consumer a voice-back to the advertiser. No longer is advertsing a single-way. If advertisers expect two-way interaction, then they alos have to be preapred for negative fall-out. This is new and most do not know how to handle effectively I agree. The only ensible option, to remain credible, is to show the problems and then offer solutions and to embrace any comments as constructive criticsm and feed into product development. Obvious statements like "don't buy this car" in reference to Chevy Tahoe fiasco, are taken at merit, and would expect "ban Phorm" to same degree. Chevy are not going to stop making cars, but will have to find ways to make better cars.

How about answering the question instead of spinning and marketing? I wasn't asking what you thought about how companies in general need to approach marketing and PR in the age of two-way mass communication. I was asking specifically whether you thought Phorm's behaviour, with respect to withholding the town video after declaring publicly that it would be released, was inappropriate and unethical.

How about a straightforward answer?

hold on - difficult to keep up! ;-)

Thanks for that. Can you share the source?

In relation to first - theres your answer in bold. They did not give user choice. So in that regards this is where crux of argument lies. Not as to whether the technology has beneifts or commercial jutification or even user merit, but in adoption of a system that fundamentlaly takes away that choice, which is not acceptible. SO that needs to be addressed.

In relation to second: Well it was obvous their PR decision - one they thought they could control and realised the you could not.

I answered that, no it was not correct. They should have released, and addressed concerns squarely. Hence my example with Chevy, as that is exaclty how they handled it.

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by feesch

Phorm aside, i have issues with that last statement - WHO has that right? We are setting systems in place that can you imagine if someone like Hitler got his hands on what could be done?! I think you find Hitler stated something like 'protecting society'...

Not more powerful, just faster & thankfully we still have a Parliamentary Voting System?

By that is OT so back to Phorm & DPI Tracking!

[feesch]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

The topic is Phorm and how to prevent it's use.The discussion is not about digital tv and tv ads.

Anyone who cannot accept this had better cease posting unless they can stick to the topic.

Thank you.

Thanks Maggie. Did not see orginal topic, jumped in half way through after being prompted off-thread in response to different article.

[phormwatch]

>Thanks for that. Can you share the source?

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PeopleOnPage

Thanks for answering my questions, though you forgot to mention that they acted 'unethically', and not just with poor strategy.

[ginge51]

Jesus ppl.
13,000 + replys in this thread :dd
Can anyone tell me if vm are going to be using phom?
As i'm not going through 13,000 + answers to find out :p

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by feesch

Totally personal.

Like I said, I do not agree in being tracked, but to some degree goes part and parcel with the web - and has been the contention (i.e. cookies) since June 1994 prior to Netscape release in Oct of same year.

But working in the indsutry I have a vested interest in hearing both sides of the argument for sure, but that is only to ensure that things can move forward, as we said 'ethically'.

Marketing people conflate two things, the Web and the Internet.

The Web is a database of web pages. And the Internet is a communication network over which those pages are transferred.

Conventional advertising on Web pages doesn't trouble me. Tracking on a particular web site doesn't trouble me provided the data is not shared and serves a useful purpose to me (eg recommendations or offers). Tracking across web sites is intrusive, and now bothers me a lot. I have actively taken steps to suppress it at every single opportunity (Dan Pollocks DNS list, MVPS DNS list, Privoxy, Adblock plus, and of course Dephormation).

Where Phorm Webwise differs is the manner in which the marketing intelligence is gathered. Phorm is not 'part and parcel' of the Web. Phorm uses Internet communications as its source of data. Phorm don't bother to seek the consent of the web sites whose content they exploit, communications they spy on, traffic they corrupt, and whose visitors they steal.

That is a parasitic business model; it exploits other peoples hard work and creativity, without permission or licence.

That must never happen. You used the word 'gambit'. There is no gambit (in the sense of a sacrifice) on offer. Simply 'checkmate'.

Phorm must be stopped.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Bobcat

@feesch.
You haven't replied to my statement regarding Sky TV and the fact that you do NOT need to be connected by telephone. Do you concede that you are wrong on that point?

Correct we haven't had the phone connected to our sky box for 4 years not had any issues..

What most of you are missing is Google, facebook, msn, and all others we can delete cookies and their tracknig ceases on us we refuse cookies from thjem they cannot continue to track me..

Phorm/webwise on my ISP there is neve a real off I have to trust the word of someone I wouldn't trust with protecting my life that my privacy isn't going to be profiled.
Google crawls the website doesn't intercept the website transmission.

What is sad is all of you fail to see the difference you see money, adverts and it is to hell with privacy.

We cannot allow our privacy to be invaided.
why should we?
Why should someone we have had dealings with be allowed to stalk me!
Yes following me about the internet is stalking me.
I have moved from one ISP because of Phorm and would do it again if I had to....

---------- Post added at 23:54 ---------- Previous post was at 23:52 ----------

Originally Posted by feesch

Thanks Maggie. Did not see orginal topic, jumped in half way through after being prompted off-thread in response to different article.

Cough it is at the top of every page that means it is repeated in this thread 877 times.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by ginge51

Jesus ppl.
13,000 + replys in this thread :dd
Can anyone tell me if vm are going to be using phom?
As i'm not going through 13,000 + answers to find out :p

Currently keeping their cards close to their chest.

However in April 2008 they said;

We are currently at the early stages of working to deliver the Webwise solution and will be writing to you nearer the time to advise when the solution will be ‘switched on’ providing more detail of what this will mean to you.

Also

Why has Virgin Media partnered with Phorm?
We are very keen to ensure our customers have a safer online experience, but without blocking access. In this respect Webwise allows us to alert customers that they may be attempting to visit a site known to be fraudulent. Additionally, by providing customers with more relevant advertising, they should be able to find products and services that are more interesting for them.

When we started asking difficult questions, Virgin brought down the shutters and starting ignoring customer concerns.
Which was enough for me.
I closed my accounts (all of them) and won't be going back.

Originally Posted by ginge51

Jesus ppl.
13,000 + replys in this thread :dd
Can anyone tell me if vm are going to be using phom?
As i'm not going through 13,000 + answers to find out :p

That's the point ginge51.This thread is about the concerted efforts to stop BT,VM and any other ISP who are considering using Phorm and trying to get the authorities to rule it's use as illegal.Unfortunately until the latter happens it's like asking how long is a piece of string.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by mkassner

Hello, I have been reading this thread with a great deal of interest. I also would appreciate it if Madslug would explain in more detail what the error I made was.

I'm not sure if the reference is to the fact that webwise cookie is stripped away as the query is sent to the actual website or if the reference was to a different part of the article. I always want to be absolutely correct in my articles, so I'd appreciate any clarification.

Thanks,

Michael P. Kassner

Is this you http://www.linkedin.com/pub/2/A03/B44

If so what is youir links into this phorm affair?

[feesch]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

Marketing people conflate two things, the Web and the Internet.

The Web is a database of web pages. And the Internet is a communication network over which those pages are transferred.

Appreciate difference between web and internet, but the system won't just be monitoring 'web' activity, but any activity running over the Intenet - so that will include IPTV and mobile (and in time) billboards as will all go via the same routing.

The bigger picture is in joining all the dots, linking consumer behaviour to all display devices.

We are discussing BT and Virgin - they are not just after distributing websites, they are content distributors of TV streams.

[ginge51]

My 6 month contract is due up any time now.
I've no bt line though
I won't be staying if this phom starts to be used that's for sure.

---------- Post added at 00:01 ---------- Previous post was at 00:00 ----------

They'll lose so many customers over this.
Why bother?