Questions Raised Over Phorm's Legality As BT Admits It Tested The Service Secretly
from the transparency,-transparency,-tranparency dept
While Phorm has gone on a charm offensive to try to convince people that its efforts are not as bad as some are making them out to be (including, by the way, using my post as a de facto forum), it appears that the effort still isn't convincing skeptics. Tim Berners-Lee made some news last week for suggesting he would switch ISPs if his started using a service like Phorm, but the bigger backlash may be coming from the legal arena. First, there was the news that BT (who had originally denied this) tested Phorm's technology, without letting users know, last summer. That has resulted in some people threatening a lawsuit. And, speaking of lawsuits, a bunch of scholars and think tankers are pointing out that Phorm may actually be illegal based on current UK laws, if it's used without first getting users to "opt-in."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: clickstream data, tim berners-lee, uk, user tracking
Companies: bt, phorm
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
More generally, on opt-out
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It is illegal
bad BT - bad Phorm
now go sit in time out
meanwhile, the data collection continues
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Above the law
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We don't need no stinkin ads...
Just for the record, I DON'T WANT ANY ADVERTISING!!!!!
I use the internet to educate myself, keep in touch with friends and loved ones, work, share my interests and masturbate.
I also shop online but far less than I do the other things mentioned above. I don't need a bunch of stiffs telling me want I am interested in or what I want.
FUCK ADVERTISING AND THE MINDLESS SHEEP THAT NEED IT!! Google text ads are just as bad as the images-that-look-like-Windows-forms-so-you'll-click-on-them and, yes, ad-revenue business plans are wack.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just one legal (untested) view
We don't agree with FIPR's analysis. And its description of the Phorm system is inaccurate. Our technology complies with the Data Protection Act, RIPA and other applicable UK laws. We've sought our own legal opinions as well as consulted widely with experts such as Ernst & Young, 80/20 Strategic Thinking, the Home Office, Ofcom and the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). We discussed our system with the ICO prior to launching it and continue to be in dialogue with the organisation.
There's loads more information on www.webwise.com and you can put your questions directly to our CEO in a live webchat on Thursday (20 March) at 1.30pm - the URL is www.webwise.com/chat
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Just one legal (untested) view
Just a point for you to remember.
Telling the same lie over and over again, does not make it true
The the Home Office advice was not legal opinion, it was advice from civel servents. Thy have been know to be wrong in the past.
20/80 thinking, well we all know you lied about that one... PI anyone.
Ernst & Young, not it people or legal people. did teh assesment under American, not UK law.
The ICO.. Only recieved paers a few weeks ago you you can not have been in talks with them.
I could go on, but the spin is making me dizzy
[ link to this | view in thread ]