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

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by jelv

Do we actually know if it is Google they look for in robots.txt or is it the any agent string? I posed this question a bit back and (unless I missed it) there was no answer:

I have seen nothing specific about this - they have kept that deliberately vague, its one of the things they don't want to talk about.

Reading between the lines, I think that what they are looking for is a straightforward robots.txt ban on the page or folder or whole site, or a noindex,nofollow metatag.

But - they are not coming clean on the details, so once again - no proper inphormation available for inphormed consent for customer, let alone webmasters.

You can check out the BT Webwise FAQ here without putting yourself at risk of picking up any webwise.bt.com cookies - I got BT to create a mirror site for the FAQ on their own servers (originally all the Webwise stuff was only available on rather flakey FASTHOSTS servers, outside the BT network

It contains the information that BT are prepared to put record. You'll notice how good they are at not really providing the information we really need to know.
It also tends to be out of date - but then that can work in our favour because you can quote that information to management and ask them if it is still their official line - at which point they sometimes have to go away and have a little think - and the trials go back another month!

http://www.productsandservices.bt.co...=CON-WEBWISE-I

[BadPhormula]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

Share price diving this morning so far

Alexander Hanff

Whilst it is great news to digest breakfast to, watching the share price fall to a new all time low of 1225. The slightly sad news is that Phorm has managed to just move off the 'sector heat map' (1 Month Biggest Movers and Losers). This move from the map is due to the share prices not falling fast enough to compete with other losers. They (Phormscum) had a very sharp decline over that 1 month period which seemed to slow down and level off (still falling though) at around the 1400 mark.

I hope broadband users join me in some serious prayer (to whoever your God is) to see the share price take another deep vertical descent towards the pit. C'mon Phormscum we know you can get back onto the 'sector heat map' as a serious contender(loser) for top(bottom) position.

[vicz]

Originally Posted by jelv

@vicz

As a user you may have the choice of whether to opt in or not. As a website owner I do not (unless I also remove my website from all search engines).

Well I am also a website owner!

I think that for most web content it is 'published' and you don't really have a say about what is done to the content - I may buy the Daily Mail just to wrap my chips in for example! Certainly there is a good case for implied consent if the content is available for anyone to view. BUT firstly I don't believe this applies to certain types of content from eg webmail and password protected forums, and secondly I hate the idea of the cookie mangling, which is firstly likely to cause all kind of problems that they haven't anticipated yet, and secondly is not playing by www standards and spirit which is ultimately likely to cause problems for everyone.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by vicz

Well I am also a website owner!

I think that for most web content it is 'published' and you don't really have a say about what is done to the content - I may buy the Daily Mail just to wrap my chips in for example! Certainly there is a good case for implied consent if the content is available for anyone to view. BUT firstly I don't believe this applies to certain types of content from eg webmail and password protected forums, and secondly I hate the idea of the cookie mangling, which is firstly likely to cause all kind of problems that they haven't anticipated yet, and secondly is not playing by www standards and spirit which is ultimately likely to cause problems for everyone.

Couple of problems with that statement. Firstly, if your buy your Daily Mail and put your chips in it, Daily Mail still get their money, you don't steal the news paper. Secondly, opinion doesn't really matter, law states informed consent which means it has to be explicit. The rights being breached are inalienable rights and therefore cannot be assumed to be waved under any circumstances.

Whether or not you like the idea of Phorm doesn't make it legal. As it stands Phorm is in my opinion and many respected legal experts, illegal, and therefore needs to be stopped. It is plain and simple.

Oh and also, buying the Daily Mail doesn't give you the right to copy it in order to use for commercial purposes (or any other purposes for that matter) the AP are very quick to shout copyright foul in the courts. Even their own journalists are not permitted to use something they have published in the AP for other commercial ventures. Read up on the AP you will have quite a surprise at how anal they are.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 ----------

OK Folks, time to start writing to Best Buy who just bought 50% of Carphone Warehouse (which I presume means Talk Talk too).

Alexander Hanff

[jelv]

@vicz

When you buy your copy of the Daily Mail are you happy for somebody to stand behind you taking a note of every article and advert you read, then when you get home you find flyers pushed through your letter box based on your perceived interests?

Also do you think that the Daily Mail are happy that the value of the adverts in their newspaper is being decreased because you will be targeted with adverts for competitive products based on the ones you have read? How long before advertisers realise what's happening and stop placing adverts in the Daily Mail?

---------- Post added at 10:47 ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 ----------

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

OK Folks, time to start writing to Best Buy who just bought Carphone Warehouse (which I presume means Talk Talk too).

Alexander Hanff

Best Buy is not buying any of Carphone Warehouse's broadband or telephony operation, which trades under the TalkTalk and AOL brands.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7389291.stm

But look out Tiscali users!

Reports suggest some of the war-chest may be used to buy the UK business of broadband firm Tiscali.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by jelv

@vicz

When you buy your copy of the Daily Mail are you happy for somebody to stand behind you taking a note of every article and advert you read, then when you get home you find flyers pushed through your letter box based on your perceived interests?

Also do you think that the Daily Mail are happy that the value of the adverts in their newspaper is being decreased because you will be targeted with adverts for competitive products based on the ones you have read? How long before advertisers realise what's happening and stop placing adverts in the Daily Mail?

---------- Post added at 10:47 ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 ----------





Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7389291.stm

(But look out Tiscali users!)

The Reg are reporting it slightly differently. They say the deal doesn't include their stake in Virgin Mobile but does include airtime reselling. I presume TalkTalk fall under the Airtime Reselling category but I am not sure either way to be honest.

Alexander Hanff

[vicz]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

The Reg are reporting it slightly differently. They say the deal doesn't include their stake in Virgin Mobile but does include airtime reselling. I presume TalkTalk fall under the Airtime Reselling category but I am not sure either way to be honest.

Alexander Hanff

Firstly let me clear I don't actually buy the daily mail

What I was trying to illustrate was my opinion that it is impractical to deny consent to read something which is being made generally available. For example, if someone opens your mail and reads a letter, that is clearly interception without consent. But if you send a postcard and postie reads the message - well it would be hard to argue no consent. I wasn't trying to suggest that you could breach copyright at will, just give an example of implied consent.

But IANAL or even an aspiring one(AH) but do have several decades studying in the (IT) corporate university of life.

---------- Post added at 11:10 ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 ----------

Also do you think that the Daily Mail are happy that the value of the adverts in their newspaper is being decreased because you will be targeted with adverts for competitive products based on the ones you have read? How long before advertisers realise what's happening and stop placing adverts in the Daily Mail?

This is indeed the implication of signing up with OIX and IMHO is what is behind K*nts assertion that over time there will be fewer adverts (if only!) because targeted ads will supplant them thru out the Internet. Doesn't make it illegal though...

[jelv]

Originally Posted by vicz

But IANAL or even an aspiring one(AH) but do have several decades studying in the (IT) corporate university of life.

Then with your IT knowledge you will know that a TCP/IP packet has a destination IP address - it's not supposed to be diverted along the way without legitimate reason.

[vicz]

Originally Posted by jelv

@vicz

When you buy your copy of the Daily Mail are you happy for somebody to stand behind you taking a note of every article and advert you read, then when you get home you find flyers pushed through your letter box based on your perceived interests?

This wouldn't necessarily bother me as the newspaper / website owner - once I have got my money / hits then it is up to the buyer to beware.

If I was the buyer it would concern me very much, thats why I am contributing to this thread. But not all buyers seem to think that way. Some people like flyers and might regard this as a service!

---------- Post added at 11:17 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ----------

Originally Posted by jelv

Then with your IT knowledge you will know that a TCP/IP packet has a destination IP address - it's not supposed to be diverted along the way without legitimate reason.

But it may take a long and tortuous route...

---------- Post added at 11:22 ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 ----------

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

<snip>
Whether or not you like the idea of Phorm doesn't make it legal. As it stands Phorm is in my opinion and many respected legal experts, illegal, and therefore needs to be stopped. It is plain and simple.

<snip>
Alexander Hanff

f

Just in case there is any doubt I agree 100% with that statement.

I just believe that a few solid examples where the case is clear is better than dozens of not so clear cut ones.

[AlexanderHanff]

OK, irrespective of whether or not TalkTalk is included in the BestBuy deal, I have fired off an email to the BestBuy Press Office as follows:

To whom it may concern,

It has been widely reported in the press and media in the UK today that BestBuy have bought a 50% stake in Carphone Warehouse however there is some confusion whether or not that includes TalkTalk (some articles are stating it doesn't include TalkTalk others are stating it does include Airtime Reselling which could possibly include TalkTalk). Either way I feel it only prudent for me to contact you and ask for an official statement for the British public with regards BestBuy opinion on TalkTalk's reported contract with Phorm Inc.

If you are unaware of the issue you can read about it here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/29/phorm_roundup/

There are also some key documents regarding the legal issues surrounding Phorm:

http://www.fipr.org/press/080423phorm.html
http://www.fipr.org/press/080406phorm.html
http://www.fipr.org/press/080317phorm.html

You can also find my dissertation on the issue here:

http://www.paladine.org.uk/phorm_paper.pdf

I should point out that Phorm market capital has dropped by ~$600 million USD in the past 2 months as a result of the negative publicity surrounding their technology. Furthermore, a popular broadsheet newspaper in the UK (The Guardian) have announced they have dropped their deal with Phorm to join their OIX advertising platform on the basis that it is not in the best interests of their brand, see here:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technolo...use_phorm.html

Having been in the US several times I have used BestBuy and understand they have a very strong brand there; so I felt it was important to make you aware that if TalkTalk (part of Carphone Warehouse) do go ahead with the Phorm deal it could potentially be very damaging to the BestBuy brand either directly or by association. A petition on the Prime Minister's official petition website has managed to make it to the top 3 petitions in just 2 short months with more than 12 000 signatures, furthermore, peers in the House of Lords, Members of Parliament and Members of the European Parliament have all expressed concerns with the British Government with regards to the legality of Phorm and it's impact on the inalienable right to privacy and have demanded answers as to why the Home Office and Information Commissioners Office have failed to investigate the legal issues which have been raised.

I would be very interested to hear BestBuy's thoughts on this matter and I am sure the general public who are passionately campaigning against Phorm would be equally interested.

I will be posting this email into the public domain and respectfully request your permission to do the same with any reply you may choose to send.

Sincerely,

Alexander Hanff
University of Cumbria

Alexander Hanff

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

OK, irrespective of whether or not TalkTalk is included in the BestBuy deal, I have fired off an email to the BestBuy Press Office as follows:



Alexander Hanff

As usual Alexander, concise, to-the-point and excellent!

Alas, it sounds like BestBuy is the Walmart of the tech world, and as such I expect them to have a similar lack of regard for everything and anything other than profit. If they think they can make money from invading the privacy of their newly-acquired broadband customers, they will. It's The American Way(tm).

I really don't wish to be a downer, but I think we're wasting our time pleading with US companies not to infringe our rights. The best hope of defeating this abomination is through UK law and demonstrating to UK companies that we'll drop them like a stone if they go anywhere near it.

[AlexanderHanff]

I tend to disagree, BestBuy is a huge "brand" in the US and it is in their best interests not to taint that brand (the same as it is for VM).

Alexander Hanff

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by mark777

Checking my e-mail, unfortunately Mark W of the BT forum can't join us for a cozy chat.

He kindly suggests that I contact an Adam L via the BT press office instead.

(Surnames shortened by me)

Do the BT bods here think that Adam, and perhaps, the BT press office would like to join us on CF for a bit of a natter? One can only try.

I very much doubt it - the Q&A thread he opened himself on Beta forums, is now locked and it is a long time since he posted on BT Beta Forums - March 15th according to his profile - a particularly poignant moment as he had to correct his own post stating that the trials had already begun and were running from 12th March to 16th April 2008, by announcing that in fact they had NOT begun.

Not been seen in the forums since although I have had one email from him.

Don't be shy about naming him - Adam Liversage is an official press officer and named in their press releases - contactable via BT Newsroom, email and telephone available if you google him and check out the html version of the 3rd entry for "Adam Liversage" google search. ("I can see the whole internet")

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by lucevans

I really don't wish to be a downer, but I think we're wasting our time pleading with US companies not to infringe our rights. The best hope of defeating this abomination is through UK law and demonstrating to UK companies that we'll drop them like a stone if they go anywhere near it.

I am under no illusion that BestBuy will make any ground shaking action as a result, but I do feel it is important to contact all parties involved in Phorm either directly or by association in order to make it clear that the public are watching and are not happy.

Keeping the pressure on is paramount to the success of the campaign and whereas I agree ultimately it needs to be resolved in the courts, it certainly doesn't hurt to write to BestBuy and/or other relevant parties.

Alexander hanff

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by vicz

Well I am also a website owner!

I think that for most web content it is 'published' and you don't really have a say about what is done to the content - I may buy the Daily Mail just to wrap my chips in for example!
snip

"Dear Vicz- Daily Mail Reader - I was watching you in the street yesterday reading your Daily Mail and also eating your chips. I have taken a note of which articles you read, and I have signed you up to a variety of advertisers who will be in touch with you shortly to let you know about products you might be interested in. I also noted that you like brown sauce on your chips, and that you bought the vegetarian sausage. Representatives of the Potato Marketing retailers association will be visiting you shortly to interest you in a variety of new chip products, and the "spread the news about Brown Sauce down south" campaign will be sharing their political aspirations with you as part of their latest viral email campaign. The animal Liberation front have added you to their mailing list and the explosives will be delivered shortly.
This is part of a Chipwise Daily Mail promotion to enhance your junk food experience and protect you from bad phish."

?? ;-)