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

[kt88man]

Originally Posted by OF1975

I used the writetothem website in order to do the letters. Its quick and efficient and saves time finding names and postal addresses.

For others who may want to write via http://www.writetothem.com/ be aware they attempt to filter out "identikit" (their term) letters. ( http://www.writetothem.com/about-qa#formletters ) So if using a generic template do rearrange the wording a little and include some of your own.

[manxminx]

Originally Posted by Ravenheart

(on his blog, Phorm said): Sir Tim Berners Lee is not familiar with the Phorm system, so he did not know that his example is impossible with our system (in the BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7299875.stm). There is no match to ‘sensitive’ areas such as medical conditions, no record of what sites users have visited, and no data of any kind is passed by the system to a third party (in his example to insurers).

(my bold)

Again, Phorm lie. It is possible with their system, but they have told us they won't do this. (won't, not can't). All we need to do is trust them on this. Trust? A company whose PR team are compulsive liers?

[OF1975]

PhormPRTeam Watch:

They were at it again here: http://www.broadbandgenie.co.uk/broa...academics-say/

I have just posted a comment in reply and its waiting for moderation right now.

[mark777]

Originally Posted by OF1975

PhormPRTeam Watch:

They were at it again here: http://www.broadbandgenie.co.uk/broa...academics-say/

I have just posted a comment in reply and its waiting for moderation right now.

You had me worried, but it's dated yesterday. I felt certain there would be a fundamental cosmic force preventing them from working on Good Friday.

[Sirius]

Just had a reply to the email side of my DPA notice.

Its the standard ******** reply.

Hello sirius

REFERENCE : *******

Thank you for your e-mail dated 20 March 2008 regarding Phorm and Virgin
Media.

I understand your concerns and would like to thank you for your
feedback, however I must stress that although Virgin Media have signed a
provisional agreement with Phorm, we still have a lot of work to do in
evaluating various aspects of any possible deployment. As a result, it
may be some months before we are in a position to confirm how and when
the solution will be implemented.

We will of course be communicating our intentions openly and
transparently and will be letting all our customers know before rolling
out the Webwise solution and we'll clearly explain how the system works.


Ultimately customers will not be forced to use the system and will be
able to keep their Internet experience just as it is now should they
wish.

For more information please see the following link:
http://www.virginmedia.com/customers/webwise.php

Thank you for contacting us.
If you have further queries regarding this matter or any other issue,
please use the link provided below:

www.virginmedia.com/contact

Please note if you reply directly to this e-mail your response will not
be received.

Kind regards


Andrew Mather
E-Contact Team
Virgin Media

Next i will reply to that asking what they intend to do about the requests i made in my letter and email, Should that have a standard reply then i forward both to the Data protection registrar with a non compliance letter.

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by mark777

You had me worried, but it's dated yesterday. I felt certain there would be a fundamental cosmic force preventing them from working on Good Friday.

That made me laugh out loud.

[Anonymouse]

I've just had a look at the European Digital Rights site, and I found an article that has me a bit worried, as it sets a precedent:

http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5...nch-isp-piracy

- surely it contravenes EU privacy laws...and if it doesn't, why not? How long before our lot start doing that? In fact, they pretty much have, haven't they?

I submit that all the online piracy in the world will not do as much harm in the long run as what our governments are doing to their own citizens. Trust is as easy to shatter as it is hard to earn. Unless they change their ways, the only two futures open to us that I can see are widespread spontaneous rebellion (it'd have to be spontaneous because if it were planned, they'd know about it...) or an Orwellian state. We could really use Hari Seldon and psychohistory about now...

The thought occurs: aren't government officials worried about their privacy? Aren't banks and online stores worried about what this might mean to their business?

As always, I note I do not intend to disappear from public view any time in the near future - well, only for a few days (if the Phorm deal goes ahead) while I sort out a new ISP.

[popper]

thats french ISP piracy directive based on ,i assume the same Belgian courts decision as below.

our fight is based on our data, our copright...

i also found hours ago, this irish related ISP piracy
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6...-isp-filtering

that lead to this
http://www.digitalrights.ie/2008/03/...is-a-bad-idea/
were it gives some costs and other information we might take note of in the 'profiling for profit' fight.

[mark777]

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...ommunity&it=le

So 38% of Phorm investors also have shares in Northern Rock. Canny lot.

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by OF1975

PhormPRTeam Watch:

They were at it again here: http://www.broadbandgenie.co.uk/broa...academics-say/

I have just posted a comment in reply and its waiting for moderation right now.

I've responded too and it's in the queue as well.

Come on people, get there and slap Phorm down! The more people put them down on every appearance they try and make the more people will realise what a scam outfit Phorm is.

[manxminx]

Originally Posted by mark777

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...ommunity&it=le

So 38% of Phorm investors also have shares in Northern Rock. Canny lot.

I just laughed so much I nearly wet myself!

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by mark777

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...ommunity&it=le

So 38% of Phorm investors also have shares in Northern Rock. Canny lot.

Is there some way of finding out who the corporate investors in Phorm are? If, for example, a well known supermarket chain is a shareholder then there might well be potential for a letter & e-mail campaign...

[mark777]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

Is there some way of finding out who the corporate investors in Phorm are? If, for example, a well known supermarket chain is a shareholder then there might well be potential for a letter & e-mail campaign...

You can get basic details using the free search at Companies House

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/

No shareholder details though.

I don't know if any of the 'paid-for' services will access the shareholder register. Certainly for a private ltd company, the shareholder details have to be returned to Companies House. I don't know about public ones. Also, the parent is American, so I don't know how that affects things. I'll try to find out more.

[popper]

hmm , do we have yet another bit of legislation to add to the DPA ,RIPA,Copyright already considered.

or is that just for the irish law, is there also an english or UK wide version.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1983/...#zza24y1983s98
Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983

Prohibition on interception of telecommunications messages. 98.—(1) A person who—
( a ) intercepts or attempts to intercept, or
( b ) authorises, suffers or permits another person to intercept, or
( c ) does anything that will enable him or another person to intercept,
telecommunications messages being transmitted by the company or who discloses the existence, substance or purport of any such message which has been intercepted or uses for any purpose any information obtained from any such message shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to any person who is acting—
( a ) (i) for the purpose of an investigation by a member of the Garda SÃÂÂ*ochána of a suspected offence under section 13 of the Post Office (Amendment) Act, 1951 (which refers to telecommunications messages of an obscene, menacing or similar character) on the complaint of a person claiming to have received such a message, or
(ii) in pursuance of a direction issued by the Minister under section 110, or
(iii) under other lawful authority, or
( b ) in the course of and to the extent required by his operating duties or duties for or in connection with the installation or maintenance of a line, apparatus or equipment for the transmission of telecommunications messages by the company.

( 3 ) ( a ) The company may, with the consent of the Minister, make regulations to carry out the intentions of this section in so far as concerns members of its staff.
( b ) The Minister, after consultation with the company, may direct the company to make regulations under paragraph (a) or to amend or revoke regulations made under that paragraph and the company shall comply with that direction.
( c ) A person who contravenes any regulation under this subsection shall be guilty of an offence.

( 4 ) ( a ) The Minister may make regulations prohibiting the provision or operation of overhearing facilities in relation to any apparatus (including private branch telephone exchanges) connected to the network of the company otherwise than in accordance with such conditions as he considers to be reasonable and prescribes in the regulations.

( b ) A person who contravenes any regulation under this subsection shall be guilty of an offence.

(5) In this section, "interception" means listening to, or recording by any means, or acquiring the substance or purport of, any telecommunications message without the agreement of the person on whose behalf that message is transmitted by the company and of the person intended by him to receive that message.

"

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Just had a reply to the email side of my DPA notice.

Its the standard ******** reply.

Quote: "...Ultimately customers will not be forced to use the system and will be able to keep their Internet experience just as it is now should they wish."

Next i will reply to that asking what they intend to do about the requests i made in my letter and email, Should that have a standard reply then i forward both to the Data protection registrar with a non compliance letter.

VM, I strongly suggest you stop using that phrase "keep their internet experience just as it is now" because it ****** your customers off when you patronize them like that.

Oh, sure, on the surface, it may appear that our internet experience hasn't changed when we opt-out of Phorm (after all, we'll still get the pages we asked for, and no Phorm targeted ads), but behind the scenes, all of our web browsing is still being re-routed through the profilers (and no, I don't care that you promise "not to relay any information outside the VM network")

Stop treating your customers like mugs: we realise that you intend to still profile our data even if we "opt-out" and even if you honour your claim not to pass profile information on to Phorm, you can still quite easily use that information for other "internal" purposes, and I do not agree to my data being used in any such way.