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

[phormwatch]

Originally Posted by alexanderhanff

city of london police appear to have misplaced the case file. No-one knows where it is and the "specialist crime unit" i was told it would be passed to does not exist.

I have given col until 1pm to get back to me with some information if they fail to do this i will be contacting ipcc, the press/media and my mp and hol contacts.

You can probably understand i am currently very angry.

Alexander hanff

OMG!

Edit:

Glad they found it. Look forward to hearing what they have to say.

[SelfProtection]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

They have now located the file and given me the crime reference number as well as the details of the DS in CID (at Snowhill) who is in charge of the case. I waiting for him to call me back and will update again once I have more info.

So despite the SCU myth they spun me at least they have found it and confimed it has a crime number and is being investigated. I am still unhappy at being misled but I look forward to an update from the DS in charge of the case in the next couple of hours.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 11:57 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------



It was CoL Head Office who told me explicitly that they have no specialist crime departments at CoL on the phone this morning and the latest information on the case file seems to support this (the case is with CID).

Alexander Hanff

If they have given a Crime number is it possible to independently ask for a Crime Number from your Local Constabulary concerning the same possible offense?

[Rchivist]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Hang on a minute - if you're already getting narky is there really any point in foisting the list on me ?
Happy to have a bash at it if you're going to be a gentleman about it. But if you load it with aggression I'll ignore it.
Your call.

Can I just clarify? - does "happy to have a bash at it" mean you will take each numbered question and either answer it with attributions/references or indicate that you cannot do so?

I am happy to post the list on that basis in order to promote debate specifically on Phorm, Webwise and Adverts. The list will contain no other side issues, will not be narky, will be gentlemanly, and will not be aggressive and is not foisted on anyone - that's why I am making sure first, that it will be dealt with in the spirit in which it will be offered. It will contain factual unanswered questions about Phorm, Webwise, and Adverts posed to you on this forum. I will NOT include snide remarks or any form of baiting or off-topic issues.

But I do need the specific assurance I am asking for before making the effort to finally compile it.If I get that unequivocal assurance, then my next post will be that list. May be a day or two though.
Otherwise I will just leave things where they stand now.

[HamsterWheel]

As I said, happy to have a bash. Can't guarantee a prompt response, depends on the length of the tome.
I'm no tech wizard, so don't expect too much.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

OMG!

Edit:

Glad they found it. Look forward to hearing what they have to say.

I wouldn't get too excited based on the call I just had with the DS in charge of the case.

Watch this space.

Alexander Hanff

[Deko]

I see hammy has added his comments

Lots of unsubstantiated nonsense here about Phorm.
Phorm is still testing its software and is not currently looking at anybody’s internet usage. And will not do so unless they opt in to its anti-phishing Webwise technology, which will be a real boon for users.
Posted by: HamsterWheel | August 14th, 2008 at 12:32 pm | Report this comment

[lardycake]

Originally Posted by Peter N

Interesting fact - Ertugrul's sister is a Financial Times journalist. (FT is one of the companies that have been linked to Phorm)

Maybe its my eyesight (or the blocks in my hosts file, or Adblock Plus or blocking 3rd party cookies) but I don't see anything on that page about Ertugrul's sister, that I am aware of. All I see is the headline "Advertisers will see you read this" By John Gapper, a picture of a man at a desk, and one line of text below that.

Is John Gapper Ertugrul's sister?

What should I be seeing?

[phormwatch]

I didn't see it at first either.

Do a page search for 'sister'. It's in a paragraph towards the bottom.

[oblonsky]

Originally Posted by lardycake

Maybe its my eyesight (or the blocks in my hosts file, or Adblock Plus or blocking 3rd party cookies) but I don't see anything on that page about Ertugrul's sister, that I am aware of. All I see is the headline "Advertisers will see you read this" By John Gapper, a picture of a man at a desk, and one line of text below that.

Is John Gapper Ertugrul's sister?

What should I be seeing?

FT have a limit to free viewing of articles, especially ones that are hyperlinked externally (the hyperlink has a UUID embedded).

If you clear your cookies and visit this page: http://www.ft.com/comment

It is currently on the front page, and you can also find it from the "commentators" and selecting John Gapper. HTH

[Frank Rizzo]

There is a "copy" of that FT article here:

Copy of FT Article

---------- Post added at 13:14 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

Alex. This should be a win-win situation.

If the CoL perform a thorough investigation (and have a favourable conclusion) then great.

If they don't do that then this gives Viviane Reding's team a bigger stick to hit the government with.

[oblonsky]

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

Alex. This should be a win-win situation.

If the CoL perform a thorough investigation (and have a favourable conclusion) then great.

If they don't do that then this gives Viviane Reding's team a bigger stick to hit the government with.

Funny how multiple failures by authorities or wide-ranging incompetency can appear indistinguishable to an outsider from a conspiracy or cover-up.

I suspect what is happening is that very few people in government have bothered to look past the spin and whispers of support from old chums but to us it seems like we are being stonewalled by a conspiracy...

[lardycake]

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

There is a "copy" of that FT article here:

Copy of FT Article

---------- Post added at 13:14 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

Thanks, I see it on that site. As per Oblonsky's explanation, I didn't get the article shown to me at all via the ft.com link.
"... FT.com has also talked to Phorm and, to round things off, Mr Ertugrul’s sister is an FT journalist. ..."

[HamsterWheel]

I suspect that what Alex will tell us about the City of London police is something like this :
They've confirmed they've got it, but have far too many cases of international fraud involving substantial amounts of money being stolen etc to devote any meaningful resources to a case where no-one appears to have lost any money or suffered any real harm.
They are stretched, I had dealings with the Serious Fraud Office about 10 years ago and at that point they could not allocate any personnel to crimes where less than £1m had been purloined. I suspect things have not improved in that time and that your case will be just chucked on a pile and left to gather dust.
Personally i think that is the approach they should take. I know I will be in the minority here !
Far happier for the police who's salaries I pay through my taxes to concentrate on real crime.
Phorm should be left to get on with its business and make sure that whatever it rolls out finally is compliant with whatever laws it thinks it needs to comply with, and with the tacit agreement of the authorities.

---------- Post added at 13:25 ---------- Previous post was at 13:23 ----------

PS on the Mr Ertugrul's sister thing. This was discussed on another site months ago and I believe it was established that she was a journo, but not at the FT. So rather ungentlemanly to have a pop (however disguised) at her.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

I suspect that what Alex will tell us about the City of London police is something like this :
They've confirmed they've got it, but have far too many cases of international fraud involving substantial amounts of money being stolen etc to devote any meaningful resources to a case where no-one appears to have lost any money or suffered any real harm.

And as usual, your presumptions/suspicians would be incorrect.

Alexander Hanff

[phormwatch]

This correct?:

Amidst a very public controversy and a consumer backlash, in July, the EU Telecoms and Media Commissioner Viviane Redding sent a letter to the British government asking it to clarify whether or not Phorm complies with EU privacy laws.

The details of the letter have not been made public, but the British government was given until the beginning of August 2008 to respond. The deadline has passed, and as of mid August, no response has been forthcoming.