be very affraid!

[dieselboy]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02...d_isp_targets/

regardless of whether you visit dodgy sites or not, you could only use internet browsing for email and thats it, why should you be monitored and made a profit out of?
surely this is against the data protection act?

[dee]

don't agree as my browsing habits are my business but dpa won't apply unless you are identifiable from the information held.

[yoshie]

That will be my inbox full of 4x4s and porn.

Jeeze I need to get out more

[dieselboy]

im afraid that somehow i forgot to spell when i wrote that post!

[TonyN]

That will be my inbox full of 4x4s and porn.

Jeeze I need to get out more

Same here, plus some horsey stuff!



Like I don't get enough junk mail anyway.

[MattF]

None of that is the point. No ISP has the right to decide what their customer classes as:

Quote: safer, more relevant

That is an individuals right and most definitely not the ISP's. And this part:

Quote: We'd certainly do an opt-in or opt-out with something like this

My arse, opt-out. EVERYTHING should be opt-in only. No-one should ever be automatically added to a list which they have to opt out of.

Whether the ISP's can do this or not is completely and utterly irrelevant. They have absolutely no damned right to do anything like this as anything other than a pure opt-in service for their customers, if they decide they want to be part of it.

If anyone on here is a customer of those three ISP's already subscribed to the idea, I would honestly suggest you contact the ISP's with a less than subtle opinion of the idea. (For once, I would even go so far as to suggest just being downright acidic). Their anonymity argument is complete balls. They cannot sanitise information to a level where anonymity can be guaranteed, and yet let it still be of use to anyone, so the anonymity argument is complete crap.

This is just downright abuse of peoples rights of privacy, and completely against the whole concept of the internet.



Edit: Just reading that article again, the sub heading is a perfect description of what any ISP should be thinking:

Quote: Smaller ISPs wouldn't touch Phorm with yours

[MattF]

A couple of info pages:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/article/...rgeted-ad-deal
http://www.ico.gov.uk/


Edit: And from this page, from the first post:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12...s-updated.html

Quote:

Who should I complain to about this if this is something I do not agree with?

The first port of call should be to complain to Virgin Media directly, state that you are not happy about your data being tracked and sold to a third party even if your identity is protected or not.

Secondly, there is a Data Protection concern regarding how the data is collected and the fact customers have automatically been opted in, regulation usually requires that customers should be given the option to Opt in.

If you are concerned and feel you need to complain to The Information Commissioner's Office - http://www.ico.gov.uk/ You can ring them on 01625 545 745.

End quote.


Obviously, the ISP one complains to should be the one you actually use.

[MattF]

BT relevant page:

http://beta.bt.com/bta/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=2477

[TonyN]

Hit a nerve Matt?



(BTW, I agree with you....)

[MattF]

Just one last post.

Another page from The Register:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02...orm_documents/


Also, unsurprisingly, the result of a Google search for Phorm spyware.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pho...G=Search&hl=en


Honestly though, whilst many of you may think I'm being totally overzealous over this, this thing really is unacceptable at ISP level. Even at lesser levels, it's not good, but at ISP level it shouldn't be allowed to happen at all. You really ought to complain to all parties concerned.

[BUSHWHACKER]

I bet you reply to this again!

[MattF]

Hit a nerve Matt?



(BTW, I agree with you....)

Oh good god yes. Seriously, I can remember arguments over this whole opt-in/opt-out setup from years ago on the MTA lists, and that was usually targeted just at single Admins who had dubious ideas of what was acceptable, but to implement systems at a national/global scale where, (to make matters even worse), some would appear to be using the system where you need to opt-out by default, (that should NEVER be the default), is inexcusable and completely wrong.

However, to then tie that in to what appears to be a cookie tracking system distributed across whichever websites are paying advertising fees to a company with an extremely dubious past, with a proxy server inbetween, (possibly), accepting and analysing the information, is way beyond any level of acceptable.

The concept is a gross abuse and misuse of the internet for the sole purpose of making extra profits for companies who are already pulling in large revenues.

To say it's hit a nerve really is somewhat of an understatement.

[MattF]

I bet you reply to this again!

Aww, crap, I couldn't help it.