Posts by Hank

More execs quit Phorm

I was with BT...

I left when they announced the trial went live. I'm now with Aquiss. UK based help (which I have not needed) and they called me at work to check if all was ok because it had been set up but I was away the week and had not used the connection. How good is that?

On top of that, great speed and reliability - and one month rolling contract. Worth the couple of quid a month over what I paid BT. They said (in writing) - not using Phorm Webwise now and won't be using it in the future either)

I'm not against behavioural advertising but I'm damned if I will be phormed as a web user or as a site publisher. Go on BT, launch it, I'm watching for the interception and copying of my intellectual copyright property by you so that your Webwise system can create derivitive works in the profiles of your customers. I will send you the bill annually (don;t want to throw you off and block the site from being phormed too soon do we!)

'Complacent' businesses turn blind eye on IP crime, says UK.gov

IP Theft - We assume consent says BT Group plc

I'm sure I've read somewhere that BT Group (as part of their Webwise Phorm interception trial) say that anything on the web means they can assume consent to copy it and use it?

The UK Government needs to wake up and maybe even have some conversations between departments. What a load of rubbish.

UK.gov misses deadline on EU Phorm probe

It's like pulling teeth isn't it?

Never one to be a pro-EU person, I have to admit some delight in the letter from the EU to our government. It's been like pulling teeth trying to get the BT trial investigated properly and Im not finished trying to get it to happen yet.

So the EU wants to know who should be investigating it properly? We all want to know that!!!

Peers call for cybercrime shakeup (again)

Phorm is a crime or isn't? Well there are laws that say interception is illegal...

...but no-one seems to want to do anything about it!

I wrote to our police chief constable to report the crime BT seemed to have admitted to on Channel 4 News (April 3rd 2008) - regarding intercepting communications of their customers without legal warrant and without customer knowledge.

Later the leaked BT document was released that spoke about the secret trial interceptions.

I got a letter back from a Detective Inspector which said that any RIPA issues had to be sent to The Interception Of Communications Commissioner (Sir Paul Kennedy, The Commissioner) in London.

He did issue a crime reporting number and said nothing about investigating my report of the incident.

So I wrote to Sir Paul's office...

Sir Paul's office points out that RIPA 2000 defines their role and it is not to investigate potential crimes under RIPA. No. That activity, they say, and I quote: "would be a matter for the prosecuting authority, namely the police and the Crown Prosecution Service." Which is almost exactly what Lord Spithead said in Hansard (i.e. the official parliamentary record)

==== Read my drafted reply to our Police service here:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33628733-virgin-media-phorm-webwise-adverts-updated-page-763.html#post34595686

==== Read what The Commissioner's office has to say about interception of communications when they wrote back to me:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33628733-virgin-media-phorm-webwise-adverts-updated-page-763.html#post34595713

We cannot have large corporates doing what they please in this area of technology. Not when there are rules to follow (nay, laws, in fact!).

It is simply not on.

And I don't want Phorm, or Webwise. In fact, although I have nothing to hide, I think I don't really want BT any more either.

Hank