QUOTE I have never backed down from a good argument/debate in my life. The point here was that Phorm was not a good argument and I was poorly informed and made the mistake of blogging about it too early. It appeared to me in the first place to be a software tool which utilized behavioral marketing. There is nothing wrong with serving adverts based on preference or anonymous behavioral patterns in my opinion. Phorm however has too much potential to be abused because it has the ability to identify an individual. Simply put PII (personally identifiable information) is in my view the privacy holy grail. I will ask this site to remove their comments or at least publish the whole story. /QUOTE
Hugely interesting. I shall be interested to follow how this one pans out. My own view - leaving aside the complicated business of Open Rights, is that corporations turning on their individual critics in this way fills me with fear. It's hardly likely to help any 'big brother' concerns and much more likely to raise the cynical beast in many of us.
It's horrific that they have turned openly against individuals. I'm afraid, despite reading their position and understanding their points, I'm unable to escape a new found dislike for the company. It's clear from my reading this morning that I am not alone. What is not clear is how many people will, like me, now know and dislike them - based on their handling of this - when previously, for one reason or another, we were pretty blissfully unaware of the whole 'story'. Counter productive in the extreme. Whatever happened to an open airing of views as the best way to solve a disagreement - or at least a clear and concerted effort to mediate an understanding. Only after clear and concerted effort should they have even considered such a fightback. Is it not clear to them that it is the very bloggers they attack that facilitate healthy open debate, an airing of views etc - to critique their guerilla tactics is cheap : reminds me of the schoolyard bully punching a smaller, weaker child every time they open their mouths!
Hello again. The links in my original comment are the actual emails sent from the Home Office to Phorm, and the advice note that was publicly released by the Home Office (strangely to a mailing list).
Re Phorm/government collusion, I'm referencing what I've been seeing online today. But I'm willing to see a different view if there's better evidence.
Broadly, though, my primary interest in Phorm at the moment is mostly what they're doing with the 'Stop Phoul Play' website they've launched and the PR issues surrounding it. What you say about people wanting to engage with Phorm but the latter behaving as if they don't reflects my own thoughts based on observing what's going on at the moment.
Thankyou for a very interesting analysis of the events.
I just wanted to correct a couple of comments you made. You mentioned that Phorm appear to have colluded with the government over the trials but this is incorrect. The FoI request revealed that a draft of the advice note provided by the Home Office was passed to Phorm for comment and changes were made to that advice based on input from Phorm themselves.
You also mentioned that people do not want to engage with Phorm on their website. I along with many others have posted sensible comments on their blog many times but the comments are never approved. Campaigners have tried to engage with Phorm many times but are just dismissed and attacked (search for the news reports on Mr Ertugrul's clash with Sir Tim Berners-Lee at the house of Lords).
Thanks again and I do hope you continue to look into the issues.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/237657/bt-bans-phorm-chatter-on-its-forums.html
In November BT's took the rather extreme step of banning discussion about phorm on its forums.
Yet more comedy from stopphoulplay they point to the blackbeak blog saying here is an example of harassing behaviour.
http://www.blackbeak.com/2008/06/14/is-this-bad-phorm-privacy-concerns-around-bt/
What they do not point to is his blog post the next day
http://www.blackbeak.com/2008/06/15/bt-shows-bad-phorm-in-its-bid-to-improve-behavioral-ad-targeting/
plus in the comment thread he writes
QUOTE
I have never backed down from a good argument/debate in my life. The
point here was that Phorm was not a good argument and I was poorly
informed and made the mistake of blogging about it too early.
It appeared to me in the first place to be a software tool which
utilized behavioral marketing. There is nothing wrong with serving
adverts based on preference or anonymous behavioral patterns in my
opinion.
Phorm however has too much potential to be abused because it has the
ability to identify an individual. Simply put PII (personally
identifiable information) is in my view the privacy holy grail.
I will ask this site to remove their comments or at least publish the whole story.
/QUOTE
It's horrific that they have turned openly against individuals. I'm afraid, despite reading their position and understanding their points, I'm unable to escape a new found dislike for the company. It's clear from my reading this morning that I am not alone. What is not clear is how many people will, like me, now know and dislike them - based on their handling of this - when previously, for one reason or another, we were pretty blissfully unaware of the whole 'story'. Counter productive in the extreme. Whatever happened to an open airing of views as the best way to solve a disagreement - or at least a clear and concerted effort to mediate an understanding. Only after clear and concerted effort should they have even considered such a fightback. Is it not clear to them that it is the very bloggers they attack that facilitate healthy open debate, an airing of views etc - to critique their guerilla tactics is cheap : reminds me of the schoolyard bully punching a smaller, weaker child every time they open their mouths!
http://cryptome.org/ho-phorm.htm
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/dates_of_meetings_between_home_o#outgoing-18669
(the FoI responses are actually pdf files so you will need to rename them once downloaded)
http://blog.planetjamie.co.uk/blog/?p=649
and the petition on the number 10 web site with 21,403 signatures on it.
ORG have lots of details. Phorm has refused to explain why they think intercepting people communications with out their consent is legal. ORG and FIPR have been asking this since last year.
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/
Also worth checking out from Open Rights Group on phorm
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2009/04/28/phorm-and-the-home-office/
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2009/04/14/eu-commission-moves-against-uk-government-and-phorm/
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2009/04/17/wikipedia-blocks-phorm/
etc
Re Phorm/government collusion, I'm referencing what I've been seeing online today. But I'm willing to see a different view if there's better evidence.
Broadly, though, my primary interest in Phorm at the moment is mostly what they're doing with the 'Stop Phoul Play' website they've launched and the PR issues surrounding it. What you say about people wanting to engage with Phorm but the latter behaving as if they don't reflects my own thoughts based on observing what's going on at the moment.
So I do intend to keep paying attention.
Thankyou for a very interesting analysis of the events.
I just wanted to correct a couple of comments you made. You mentioned that Phorm appear to have colluded with the government over the trials but this is incorrect. The FoI request revealed that a draft of the advice note provided by the Home Office was passed to Phorm for comment and changes were made to that advice based on input from Phorm themselves.
So you can make your own informed opinion on the content of those emails, the advice note can be found here http://cryptome.org/ho-phorm.htm and the freedom of information request that shows the emails can be found here http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/dates_of_meetings_between_home_o#outgoing-18669 (they are actually pdf files so you will need to rename them once downloaded).
You also mentioned that people do not want to engage with Phorm on their website. I along with many others have posted sensible comments on their blog many times but the comments are never approved. Campaigners have tried to engage with Phorm many times but are just dismissed and attacked (search for the news reports on Mr Ertugrul's clash with Sir Tim Berners-Lee at the house of Lords).
Thanks again and I do hope you continue to look into the issues.