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

[mattyh]

Coming into this a bit late I realise... but several pages back, some were saying that Google relied on implied consent to crawl websites...

Don't you have to physically add each site you wish them to index to their list of URLs, at www.google.com/addurl

therefore inphormed consent is gained, by the act of you adding your site to their index?

Or have I got confused?

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by mattyh

...
therefore inphormed consent is gained, by the act of you adding your site to their index?

Or have I got confused?

Confused: google automatically follows links from pages to find other pages.

[mattyh]

Damn, thought I was on to a winner there

[vicz]

Originally Posted by mattyh

Coming into this a bit late I realise... but several pages back, some were saying that Google relied on implied consent to crawl websites...

Don't you have to physically add each site you wish them to index to their list of URLs, at www.google.com/addurl

therefore inphormed consent is gained, by the act of you adding your site to their index?

Or have I got confused?

Google runs 'webcrawlers' which follow links to find and index websites. So if you have a site that is linked from anywhere eventually google is going to find it and index it. If it finds a robots.txt file the webcrawler will obey its instructions about what and what not to index. The URL you quote can be used to encourage the webcrawler to visit your site sooner rather than later, most website owners welcome this.

[dav]

Originally Posted by vicz

Ever been to a car boot sale? Same dynamics at work.

Actually, no, I haven't.

I find the whole idea of people swapping their unwanted crap for pennies slightly distasteful.

Probably why I have no interest in stocks

[Dephormation]

One for Alexander... using this flow I can't see how Phorm are not processing personal data I guess you agree?
from here

Particularly noted this example... perhaps replace 'CCTV' with spyware and 'physical characteristics' with 'browsing characteristics';

There will be circumstances where the data you hold enables you to identify an individual whose name you do not know and you may never intend to discover.
Example: Where an individual is not previously known to the operators of a sophisticated multi-camera town centre CCTV system, but the operators are able to distinguish that individual on the basis of physical characteristics, that individual is identified. Therefore, where the operators are tracking a particular individual that they have singled out in some way (perhaps using such physical characteristics) they will be processing ‘personal data’.

[Rchivist]

Interesting discovery relating to my BTOpenworld free ISP space. I use this site, which used to be the forwarding location for my domain (now moved to its own space), to host pages which simply now redirect to the new site - to make sure that old google links take people to the new site.

I thought it would be an interesting experiment to prepare it for Webwise, with an appropriate Webwise cookie trap, and robots.txt that didn't forbid google, and a "body text" statement banning Phorm and all its works, and some 3rd party stats counter links to give me a logging facility (there aren't any logs available on my free ISP space) and then see if any Webwise visits occurred when the trials started. Webwise has not been given the url for its black list.

I set up the Google Webmaster tools, including getting the site google verified, then just checked that robots.txt was working properly - I'm familiar with doing this from 2 other domains.

Then I discovered the problem - I can't actually set up a "valid" robots.txt for the ISP hosted pages - because as far as google is concerned the only robots.txt it sees is the one at the top level domain - the ISP domain of btinternet.com .

My site robots.txt is www.btinternet.com slash tilde~ username slash robots.txt

The one google sees is www.btinternet.com/robots.txt which merely says

User-agent: *
Disallow: /Templates
Disallow: /virtualworlds

which seems to be the one that btinternet.com uses for all their hosted space.

So I suppose my question is - IF the "official BT/Phorm/Webwise" way of keeping webwise out of my site is supposed to be by using robots.txt (not legally good enough I know, but let's put that on hold for a moment) - how could I do it? On my ISP hosted pages I CANT create a valid robots.txt that would keep google out.

I don't actually WANT to keep google or phorm out of this test site by robots.txt - I want to use it as a test site - but IF I wanted to use the official declared robots.txt method of banning Phorm/Webwise, I can't see any way of doing it.

And if the official way of doing this, recommened by my Webwise-prone ISP is actually not possible on ISP webspace provided by the same ISP, don't THEY have a problem?

Anyway - I'll throw this at them and see what happens and keep you posted.

[vicz]

Originally Posted by dav

Actually, no, I haven't.

.. people swapping their unwanted crap for pennies ...

Got it in one!

Early in the day, more buyers than sellers, prices high. Later in the day, buyers are spent out or have gone home, prices fall.

[windowcleaner]

Originally Posted by oblonsky

Find the weakest points in the ISPs defence and stick to that.

They can't distinguish between protected and published web content therefore their system can never be legal.

You keep going on about this point, but this is exactly what phorm are saying they CAN do. In fact this is their STRONGEST point.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by R Jones

Then I discovered the problem - I can't actually set up a "valid" robots.txt for the ISP hosted pages - because as far as google is concerned the only robots.txt it sees is the one at the top level domain - the ISP domain of btinternet.com .

What you require is a meta tag like the robots meta tag.

Perhaps an easier solution would be the one described in the link below, allowing you to reclaim royalties for unauthorised commercial exploitation of your content;

Copyright, Royalties and Invoicing

[icsys]

Originally Posted by popper

Simon Watkin stated:
"You will have read that we emphasised that targeted online advertising services should be provided with the explicit consent of ISPs' users or by the acceptance of the ISP terms and conditions, and undertaken with the highest regard to the respect for the privacy of ISPs' users and the protection of their personal data.

Explicit consent should be informed consent, informed by a clear explanation about what the advertising service does and doesn't do. "

I was of the impression that you CANNOT rely on acceptance of terms and conditions to give explicit consent.

I was also of the impression that any changes to T&Cs must be notifed in writing (Not simply posted on a web page) to those that it affects.

[thebarron]

Originally Posted by windowcleaner

You keep going on about this point, but this is exactly what phorm are saying they CAN do. In fact this is their STRONGEST point.

I run and maintain several web based application sites that require log in to access, most of the site can only be seen after log in and it contains sensitive information. Google cannot index it by following links from the main site as there are none unless logged in. Phorm will be able to see it though as they intercept the stream at the ISP's end and that is not legal.

[Wildie]

Has any looked at the fact that they cannot profile children who cannot give consent, and have NO way of knowing who using the pc at any given time only that it is been used, and that they claim they don`t profile children is a lie.
also look up on the reg about the ruling made on J K Rowling case about her sons private data been process. although it was a photo it`s still data used on him.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...rivacy_ruling/

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by Dephormation

What you require is a meta tag like the robots meta tag.

Perhaps an easier solution would be the one described in the link below, allowing you to reclaim royalties for unauthorised commercial exploitation of your content;

Copyright, Royalties and Invoicing

Yes - the metatag is the obvious one, but I don't recall anything from Webwise/Phorm/BT that says they are looking at the metatags. They have been SO vague about robots.txt and unless I've missed it, there has been nothing about metatags. Please - if anyone has anything concrete explaining how they deal with noindex,nofollow metatags, please do post it.

I know that for some this is "not the issue" - but it seems that even if the way Phorm/Webwise/BT are looking at it has practical holes in it then it tends to cause more embarrassment for them and more pressure.

I agree that the real issue is the legality of the interception in the first place, and the need for explicit, informed, rather than implied consent, but I am trying to challenging the way even their "implied" consent model works.

Let's keep em busy!

[thebarron]

Originally Posted by R Jones

Yes - the metatag is the obvious one, but I don't recall anything from Webwise/Phorm/BT that says they are looking at the metatags. They have been SO vague about robots.txt and unless I've missed it, there has been nothing about metatags. Please - if anyone has anything concrete explaining how they deal with noindex,nofollow metatags, please do post it.

I know that for some this is "not the issue" - but it seems that even if the way Phorm/Webwise/BT are looking at it has practical holes in it then it tends to cause more embarrassment for them and more pressure.

I agree that the real issue is the legality of the interception in the first place, and the need for explicit, informed, rather than implied consent, but I am trying to challenging the way even their "implied" consent model works.

Let's keep em busy!

See may post above : The sensative parts of my websites can only be viewed once logged on. Phorm cannot know if the user has logged on and therefore cannot know the data has implied consent or not. I do not need meta tags or robots.txt to prevent Google from seeing this data as Google (other search engines) cannot see them. If I have to use meta tags or robots.txt then I am being asked to Opt-Out which is not legal!