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

[Florence]

Originally Posted by oblonsky

Sorry Florence I diagree - I don't think she put on a good show. On live TV she said, in relation to the two secret trials BT have admitted to, "We absolutely were not spying on our customers..."

Now, considerind that the participants to the trials didn't know about the trials, and that the trials covertly watched their web browsing habits, anyone with a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary could have something to say about Ms Sanderson's assertion here.

I posted that she made a good show of trying to say BT were not breaking the law but her body language gave a different impression..

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by Peter N

Interesting that everytime there is an important news story or other piece of info certain people do their best to divert our attention.

This is the story that they are trying to bury.

You know what struck me on the way home?

"The government has failed to meet a deadline to respond to European Commission questions"

Perhaps the reason BERR can't respond, the Police, the Home Office, the Cabinet Office, and all the other agencies involved aren't responding...

Is the Government is already facing legal action by the European Commission?

If it were true, perhaps it might also explain the 'emergency cabinet' called for September in the midlands?

Just guesswork of course.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

You know what struck me on the way home?



Perhaps the reason BERR can't respond, the Police, the Home Office, the Cabinet Office, and all the other agencies involved aren't responding...

Is the Government is already facing legal action by the European Commission?

If it were true, perhaps it might also explain the 'emergency cabinet' called for September in the midlands?

Just a theory of course.

I don'ty think it can be swept uinder the carpet now but the actions of most newspapers are somewhat strange unles they are dubious of being prosicuted for making this news....

[pseudonym]

Originally Posted by oblonsky

Sorry Florence I diagree - I don't think she put on a good show. On live TV she said, in relation to the two secret trials BT have admitted to, "We absolutely were not spying on our customers..."

Now, considerind that the participants to the trials didn't know about the trials, and that the trials covertly watched their web browsing habits, anyone with a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary could have something to say about Ms Sanderson's assertion here.

I think it could be argued that BT were not spying on their customers, they invited in a rather dubious third party company that speciallises in that sort of activity to spy on their customers.

[mark777]

A few things that strike me in the light of the letter.

Wasn't it only a few days ago that BT confirmed that the trials would go ahead soon? With that letter in the background?

Surely BT must have known about the letter at the AGM when it was stated that the trials would begin in a couple of weeks.

It's very unlikely that they didn't know about the letter, but if they didn't, the bunker will be in a tizz tonight.

I wonder who leaked it. I doubt it was HMG. Maybe a miffed EU commission, fed up with being ignored? Just like we have been fobbed off.

Can you imagine the buck passing in Whitehall that must have been going on?

In all of this, involving HMG, BT and Phorm, it's the latter who is the tiddler, the one likely to be lined up by the other two to carry the can somehow. But then Kent has a big gob. Maybe he knows things that would be acutely embarrassing to HMG and BT.

I think that mainstream media coverage is not far off. Bags of it.

[Wildie]

What gate they going to call it?

[mark777]

The Downing St website has changed and the new URL to the petition is :-

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ispphorm/

The old URL redirects to the new one.

Apologies if this has been posted before.

[pseudonym]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

No, what I'm saying is that no harm has been done in the tests.
Tests necessary to make sure that what is ACTUALLY rolled out is robust and complies with whatever is thought necessary. I think it will be.

By testing your "bit of new software" without their customers' permission, BT have betrayed their customers' trust, and if the tests were illegal, their shareholders too - and I'd be amazed if the tests weren't illegal, the news about the governments failure to respond to the EU letter before the deadline does nothing to convince me otherwise http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08..._phorm_letter/

As a BT shareholder, I'm outraged that BT would be willing to do so much damage to their reputation for such a small amount of income.



If BT are that desperate for extra cash, they should cut their wage bill by sacking the looney tunes who want to go ahead with this system.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Wildie

What gate they going to call it?

btphormedgate

[lardycake]

Originally Posted by Peter N

Interesting that everytime there is an important news story or other piece of info certain people do their best to divert our attention.

This is the story that they are trying to bury.

Originally Posted by warescouse

Yes, only about 4-5 hours of prime forum time wasted on arguments we have all heard and seen before on this forum by the same poster. EU releases something we have been waiting to read and what are we debating? Not that letter, its unimportant
I despair at our gullibility at times.

I prefer page 2
showing the actual EC correspondence

I agree, the EU letter is what is important and not endless circular arguments. Don't get lured into that wheel.

[philj]

want some shares?

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...PHRM.L&it%3Dle

-12.50

[Florence]

Originally Posted by pseudonym

By testing your "bit of new software" without their customers' permission, BT have betrayed their customers' trust, and if the tests were illegal, their shareholders too - and I'd be amazed if the tests weren't illegal, the news about the governments failure to respond to the EU letter before the deadline does nothing to convince me otherwise http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08..._phorm_letter/

As a BT shareholder, I'm outraged that BT would be willing to do so much damage to their reputation for such a small amount of income.



If BT are that desperate for extra cash, they should cut their wage bill by sacking the looney tunes who want to go ahead with this system.

but hammy thinks it is none of my business the wages for Managers at BT then once inphormed I was a shareholder he came back I was in the minority...
Anyway back to phorm I feel the implications of having Phorm on the network is too high a risk. We have to rely on trust they will not function creep and personally I don't think with the present responses from all parties invovled and this includes the government it shouldn't be deployed.

[madslug]

Originally Posted by warescouse

Yes, only about 4-5 hours of prime forum time wasted on arguments we have all heard and seen before on this forum by the same poster. EU releases something we have been waiting to read and what are we debating? Not that letter, its unimportant
I despair at our gullibility at times.

I prefer page 2
showing the actual EC correspondence

Guilty as charged. I was over at El Reg, catching up on comments there. Seemed a bit excessive to be duplicating everything here as well.

However, if the various government departments have not been able to prepare a defence, considering how many questions have been put to them and how much FoI documentation they must have been re-reading through then it does say something about their efficiency.

During the same period, the ICO has managed to answer an email from me - nothing new since the statement made in April even though there must be changes being made to the DPI software. Time for another FoI request?
So far, the HO have failed to acknowledge or respond to an email I sent 27th June.

I think that Florence is correct in showing an inability by those who should be responsible to cope with the whole process. The load from the EU is now putting everything under breaking strain.
Maybe they are waiting for the trial results to show that they have done a 'good job'.

... and Jumbo was his name.

[phormwatch]

OK - so any ideas about getting the issue into the mainstream press?

I've emailed Charles Arthur with the Reg article re: the EU letter...

[madslug]

Originally Posted by mark777

The Downing St website has changed and the new URL to the petition is :-

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ispphorm/

The old URL redirects to the new one.

Apologies if this has been posted before.

Perhaps this explains why they stopped taking new petitions, and used the PM being away as an excuse.
At least the redirect keeps links 'live' for a while. Can someone let us know when the Webwise leaflet is updated for the new address?

Can't say I like the new site. They try to be all accessible and then default to a font size of 0.8em - just as well I have a browser with a good font set (and set to a minimum font size)

---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 20:50 ----------

Washington Post update re Congress responses

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...70.html?sub=AR

"The revelations came in response to a bipartisan inquiry of how more than 30 Internet companies might have gathered data to target customers....

Markey said he and his colleagues plan to introduce legislation next year, a sort of online-privacy Bill of Rights, that would require that consumers must opt in to the tracking of their online behavior and the collection and sharing of their personal data.

But some committee leaders cautioned that such legislation could damage the economy by preventing small companies from reaching customers."

They got that last part right