The arguments have started....

madasahatter · Apr 02, 2008, 03:31:28

SO - is Phorm legal......or not?

Phorm

Simon · Apr 02, 2008, 08:05:57

I thought it had already been decided that it is.

madasahatter · Apr 02, 2008, 08:13:20

Maybe could have worded that better Simon - maybe it was the trials already carried out (without consent from the punters) that could be challenged. they have admitted to 2 secret trials - how many more did they do?

Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), intercepting Internet traffic without a warrant or consent is considered an offence, so they have clearly gone against that, and will continue to do so if they go for the "opt out" method of conscription rather than "opt in".

This bit did amuse me though:

"both companies have said the technology complies with UK law as customers have to give informed consent to use the technology.

BT has said that customers will be issued with amended terms and conditions before any eventual roll out of the technology. "

The peeps in the trial certainly didn't give informed consent - where were BTs "amended terms and conditions" for them?

I really really hope that some of those very peeps band together and give BT a right royal kick up the backside.

Rik · Apr 02, 2008, 08:50:21

As far as I can tell, the trials were illegal under RIPA as there was no consultation or consent, in fact BT say they didn't tell people deliberately. I would love to see that come to court.

madasahatter · Apr 02, 2008, 08:53:01

Quote from: Rik on Apr 02, 2008, 08:50:21
I would love to see that come to court.

Me too - it's time the high and mighty BT was taken down a peg or three...

Rik · Apr 02, 2008, 09:28:44

Maybe we should all write to our MPs. I'm sure they'd like to divert attention from themselves.

madasahatter · Apr 02, 2008, 14:08:39

On the other hand, they wouldn't want to upset big business would they?

Rik · Apr 02, 2008, 14:09:49

That depends on how much interest we are taking in their expenses at the time.

madasahatter · Apr 02, 2008, 14:12:59

Good thinking Batman - right - let's do some digging

Rik · Apr 02, 2008, 14:30:37

Pass me that FoIA application form.

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 10:28:21

If you want to watch some good squirming, then:

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/science_technology/bt+spies+on+customers/1933047

Emma Sanderson being interviewed on Channel 4.

madasahatter · Apr 04, 2008, 12:14:33

priceless

errr errrrm errrrrrr

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 12:22:45

Pathetic, I bet she is on over a £100,000 a year.

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 12:27:44

She'll be promoted after that performance!

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 12:32:49

Surely BT could have found a credible individual for an interview amongst their masses.

Erm er erm er

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 12:34:36

Isn't that an oxymoron, In?

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 12:36:45

Probably Rik, dam fine washing powder as well..

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 12:46:30

Amazing stuff, that white powder...

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 13:07:35

Our age is showing Rik.

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 13:09:12

I know. It's when I remember all the words to the Pepsodent jingle I really begin to feel it.

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 13:14:58

Ditto.. ( and I can ).

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 14:32:35

... and Hoover!

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 16:14:55

Can't remember that one in total, just beats as it sweeps as it cleans..

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 16:18:31

That's the bit I remember too - odd how one sticks in the entirety, the other only partially. OTOH, both have stuck with us for the best part of 50 years, which is probably longer than any modern ad will.

Simon · Apr 04, 2008, 21:37:46

Strangely, the interview seems to have disappeared.

D-Dan · Apr 04, 2008, 21:45:28

I just watched the squirm - it's still there

madasahatter · Apr 04, 2008, 23:47:20

HHMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm - another vote for illegal here

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 00:35:23

Should IDNet be following this example?

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/news/EkpZkAyAAEpjMnLTqK.html

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 08:17:47

Definitely In - the tide is turning

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 09:39:21

Probably BT have blocked it from coming across the network.

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 10:05:31

Quote from: madasahatter on Apr 05, 2008, 08:17:47
Definitely In - the tide is turning

I agree Mad, the more that take a public stand against it, the better.

Sebby · Apr 05, 2008, 10:06:21

Quote from: Inactive on Apr 05, 2008, 00:35:23
Should IDNet be following this example?

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/news/EkpZkAyAAEpjMnLTqK.html

Without a doubt, yes.

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 10:11:55

Perhaps some kind member of Admin may suggest it to them.

Sebby · Apr 05, 2008, 10:15:57

You mean Rik or Lance, then.

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 10:21:34

Simon's already said he's against it, iirc, but I'll see what can be done.

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 10:26:37

Quote from: Sebby on Apr 05, 2008, 10:15:57
You mean Rik or Lance, then.

Or you, or Simon, and I seem to recall some guy called Adam.

Sebby · Apr 05, 2008, 10:27:51

I'm just a poor old mod.

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 10:28:15

Quote from: Rik on Apr 05, 2008, 10:21:34
Simon's already said he's against it, iirc, but I'll see what can be done.

Thanks Rik, I reckon that would be a good move, the more ISP's that make a public stand the better.

Sebby · Apr 05, 2008, 10:30:10

I doubt IDNet would welcome it with open arms to be honest.

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 10:30:29

Quote from: Sebby on Apr 05, 2008, 10:27:51
I'm just a poor old mod.

Lets get this clear Seb, you are an accountant, so not poor.

You ain't old by my standards, and you are part of the Admin Team.

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 10:31:50

He's not old either.

Inactive · Apr 05, 2008, 10:32:30

Quote from: Sebby on Apr 05, 2008, 10:30:10
I doubt IDNet would welcome it with open arms to be honest.

As Rik has said, I am fairly sure that SimonD has said that they will not have anything to do with it.

Just needs confirming in public.

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 10:36:04

Quote from: Simon on Apr 04, 2008, 21:37:46
Strangely, the interview seems to have disappeared.

It's there for me, Simon.

Tim_idnet · Apr 07, 2008, 17:46:56

Hi All

Just a quick note about IDNet's stance on Phorm, for those particularly concerned about the issue - I can confirm that IDNet will not be employing Phorm's services on our network.

Tim

Rik · Apr 07, 2008, 17:47:45

Thanks, Tim. I'm sure we're all very pleased (but not surprised) to hear that.

Sebby · Apr 07, 2008, 18:07:31

Thanks, Tim. I thought that would be the case, but it's always nice to know for sure.

Danni · Apr 07, 2008, 18:56:53

Thanks Tim. Reassuring for when I finally get back to you

Lance · Apr 07, 2008, 19:08:30

Thanks for the update, Tim

BrianM · Apr 07, 2008, 19:23:04

Thanks for the info' Tim, great news.

Simon · Apr 07, 2008, 19:30:47

Thanks for the clarification, Tim.

Inactive · Apr 07, 2008, 23:56:58

Quote from: Tim_idnet on Apr 07, 2008, 17:46:56
Hi All

Just a quick note about IDNet's stance on Phorm, for those particularly concerned about the issue - I can confirm that IDNet will not be employing Phorm's services on our network.

Tim

Thanks Tim, confirmation of that on the IDNet Web Site may be helpful to potential and existing customers.

Sebby · Apr 08, 2008, 19:26:27

Anyone seen this?

Rik · Apr 08, 2008, 19:27:17

Yeah, for 'over-zealous' read 'you caught us'.

Sebby · Apr 08, 2008, 19:28:04

How right you are, Rik.

Simon · Apr 08, 2008, 21:14:50

That's the trouble with Wikipedia. I certainly wouldn't trust it for anything other than trivia.

madasahatter · Apr 09, 2008, 00:19:20

Quote from: Sebby on Apr 08, 2008, 19:26:27
Anyone seen this?

That's just taking the p$%^ - makes them even more shady than they did before if that were possible.

Shows they are running scared a bit though, which has got to be good news

madasahatter · Apr 10, 2008, 13:46:24

Some good news:

Phorm must be opt in

Sebby · Apr 10, 2008, 13:47:32

That's good news.

madasahatter · Apr 10, 2008, 13:53:01

Not for Phorm though - can't see many peeps actually opting in - can you?

Sebby · Apr 10, 2008, 13:55:02

I can't see anyone opting in!

madasahatter · Apr 10, 2008, 13:55:34

Quote from: Sebby on Apr 10, 2008, 13:55:02
I can't see anyone opting in!

Great innit?

Rik · Apr 10, 2008, 14:39:56

Actually, I can see people opting in. They'll be the same people who don't think they need anti-virus, and who give out their email addresses on public boards. They probably think they've won lotteries they never entered to.

Captain K · Apr 14, 2008, 20:44:25

There's no doubt Phorm will sell its services to the customers of the ISP's who sign up, touting various benefits to the service, entry into a prize draw, that sort of thing. Wouldn't surprise me either if there are a series of tick-boxes much like one online publisher who's PC newsletters I subscribe to, where in order to properly ensure you're "opted out", some of the boxes have to be ticked, some have to be empty.

Call me a cynic, but.....

Rik · Apr 15, 2008, 09:22:51

I agree with you, Bruce. Not only do they make some opt out and some opt in, but they then use wording which requires careful thought about just what the tick signifies.