Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[3x2]

Definitely, Rather than second hand info, awful Pr spin and our guesswork, lets have a proper genuine investigation from someone who knows what they are talking about.

Thar ye go .. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02...orm_documents/

(But put simply - how can Phorm guess what might interest you unless they have intercepted your communications?)

It's not that I want anyone kept in the dark it's just that the more people concentrate on cookies, psuedorandom numbers and other minutiae the easier it is for Phorm and the ISP's to pass this off as something other than a wire-tap. At it's heart, that is the proposal - to intercept your web activities and analyse them.

Phorm are quite happy for us all to be lost in the detail - it's a distraction, a sleight of hand. Worse, anyone coming to this debate without a technical background just sees technical talk and tunes out.

RE : (http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/...et-with-phorm/)

The story annoyed me a little simply because the FIPR had already made a statement on Phorm but now seem to be allowing Phorm to add another "this well respected organisation has examined our systems and ... " to it's PR machine. Effectively neutralising the previous FIPR statement.

I agree with AH on this one - we need to concentrate on the legal/moral aspects.

[popper]

No.28 is that Flo_le francais by any chance?, iv been lax in keeping track

BTW Mick is the board running slow or being overloaded by the influx of PHorm Guests to this thread right now?

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

If we manage to get an injunction issued you will be able to watch Phorm's share price break new records for the worst performing stock ever.

Completely agree and that would be awesome.

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

I am going to request FIPR submit an Amicus Curiae for the injunction hearing based on their legal opinion of Phorm under RIPA. I also want to investigate if it is possible for multiple persons to be involved in filing for an injunction, because then we have the possibility of getting thousands of people supporting the injunction application and possibly (if people turn up) a very interesting day at court.

Alexander Hanff

Again that would be awesome if the FIPR would do so. I think the best chance from the tiny bit of googling I have done is if you applied for an interlocutory injunction which essentially, if granted, would put a freeze on them implementing the systems until a full hearing could be held. Thats just my two penneth worth though.

[ceedee]

I'd imagine Chris Williams at El Reg might have an idea who'd be good to approach for advice on a RIPA injunction. (And he's probably still in contact with the original BT Business victim in Weston-super-Mare.)

Or, erm, Privacy International?

[popper]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

I am also interested in filing for an injunction order from the courts to prevent BT, VM and CPW from deploying this technology.

If anyone has any information on how to file an injunction order (not something I have ever done) I would appreciate some input.

The main points I intend to lean on for the purpose of the injunction are:

1. Informed Consent of -all- parties under RIPA
2. The risk of criminalising millions of people by making them complicit in criminal breaches of RIPA

I will be relying on the number of popular sites on the internet which already have expressed terms on their site's denying the right to intercept, such as BBC and Amazon.

So I am calling upon this community to try and come up with a big list of popular sites which meet this criteria as this list will be important for both point 1 and point 2. If there are a lot of popular sites with similar terms then the risk of a customer becoming complicit rises significantly.

Alexander Hanff

im in the middle of trying to find the/an answer for you Alexander, i suspect a simple small claim might do it, perhaps even the online website version..

not found it yet but this made me LOL
"Anti-Social Behaviour" and explains some basics too.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/docume...ing/pdf/138685
Anti-Social Behaviour

....

What is an injunction?

5. Injunctions are

civil orders obtained from the County Court.

An injunction prohibits the person

concerned from engaging in the behaviour detailed in the injunction.

Injunctions can be used to

prevent a range of anti-social behaviour relating to housing for example, using a property for drug dealing, playing loud music at night, barking dogs, verbal abuse and vandalism.

6. Some injunctions can exclude the person from specified places or areas.

The Court may grant an injunction for a specified period as it sees fit, or may decide that the injunction will apply until the injunction is varied or discharged.

This can mean that an injunction can be in force for the lifetime of the person who it is obtained against.

7. Breach of the provisions of an injunction can result in up to two years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine for contempt of court.

8. Injunctions may only be used to control the behaviour of those with the mental capacity to understand what they are doing and how to modify their behaviour.

9. Injunctions are a discretionary remedy, this means that the court can decide whether it would be appropriate for one to be issued.

Injunctions are increasingly used to control anti-social behaviour in situ rather than displacing the problem, for example by not evicting nuisance tenants who might then be able to continue the behaviour unchecked in another property.

10. Injunctions are quick to obtain. The civil (balance of probabilities) and not criminal (beyond reasonable doubt) rules of evidence apply to injunctions.

This means that injunctions require a lesser burden of

proof than a criminal prosecution, which may lead to a more certain outcome.

They are aimed at stopping the anti-social behaviour rather than punishing the perpetrator.

----------------------

No.6/7 seems to imply you can name persons such as the CEO/COO etc of the ISP company involved and if the court approve it, you get to put the people involved/named in direct line if they or anyone below/under them break the Injunction.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

...and Phorm is supposed to ;improve' security?

Possible trivial Phorm opt-in "Exploit" discovered - ISPr Forum

Please anyone visiting that link the story is about, please please delete the cookie afterwards or you will have opt in from an image that doesn't show on the page.

[popper]

this looks like part of what your after
URGENT AND INTERIM APPLICATIONS
http://www.publicguardian.gov.uk/doc...cations_PD.pdf

the court clerks can usually also help in these matters about the using the right forms etc.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by popper

this looks like part of what your after
URGENT AND INTERIM APPLICATIONS
http://www.publicguardian.gov.uk/doc...cations_PD.pdf

the court clerks can usually also help in these matters about the using the right forms etc.

That's handy then, one of my best friends is a clerk in my local county court I will be seeing him either this weekend or early next week too as I have been fixing his laptop for him

Alexander Hanff

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

I have just created a petition on the PM website demanding that he instruct the Home Office to initiate criminal proceedings under RIPA against BT for their trials in July 2007. I will post the link once (if) the petition is accepted by the PM web team.

Tonight I am also going to write multiple letters to my MP, MEPs and Lords requesting them to increase the severity of the debate on this issue with particular focus on the criminal aspects of this technology under RIPA. I will post the letters here once I have written them so anyone else who wishes to take similar action can use them as templates. They will be up by the end of the weekend.

Alexander Hanff

will sign that as soon as its up

[popper]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

That's handy then, one of my best friends is a clerk in my local county court I will be seeing him either this weekend or early next week too as I have been fixing his laptop for him

Alexander Hanff

LOL, that helps....

dont forget to write up the step by step, all you need now are the names to include in the injunction application (ASBO for the UK's CEO's and COO's LOL)

he will know about useing the small claims track for this too

there ya go , i know id seen some help , i cant find the online Small claim URL ,its in my bookmarks somewere ,but thats way to BIG ....

i'd be a lot happyer if MrAngry were to make an appearance, Top Man for this thread direction.

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/11563.htm 7.12

http://search.opsi.gov.uk/search?q=S...psi_collection

http://search.opsi.gov.uk/search?q=S...psi_collection

http://search.opsi.gov.uk/search?q=i...arch_semaphore

http://search.opsi.gov.uk/search?q=%...psi_collection

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

That's handy then, one of my best friends is a clerk in my local county court I will be seeing him either this weekend or early next week too as I have been fixing his laptop for him

Alexander Hanff

Great news and definately speak to them about this and get as much in-depth information as you can. I arent sure that a local county court would have the jurisdiction/power to make a ruling on such an important case with such nationwide ramifications but I could be wrong and by all means get your friends advice and input.

[popper]

while iv not really looked that hard, all the Uk law seems to refect that
5. Injunctions are

civil orders obtained from the County Court.

under EU law (iv not looked yet) it might be that it needs a high court judge ruling to keep it in place....

but you have to wonder how much copy in the mainstream press a simple County Court Injunction against the 3 main ISP CEO's and COO's will get.... 75% of the whole UK Broadband market remember, under(per-)Phorm.

the bank charges press coverage on overdrive perhaps

i still think the users keyboard entry and click data copyright has lots of chance to cover many more legal miles in this, along side and/or seperate to RIPA and DPA, but noone seems interested in protecting or mentioning that aspect.

and thats strange given the mass of news copy given to forcing ISPs to install the very same deep-packet inspection equipment to monitor commercial and domestic piracy for the corporations.

what about the domestic users copyright and the ISP's and profiling companys commercial piracy of that for profit?....

iv found lots of interesting information on the http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ternet-issues/ messageboard in the past, its been real slow for a while though.

it might be werth asking BankFodder
Administrator
The Consumer Action Group to see if he can give any legal tips in this growing UK ISP/Phorm fight and other related matters.

such as throttling,billing after account closer, unlawful charges etc if your looking to win other smaller battles for the ordinary users.

[TheBottomLiner]

you do not own me

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by popper

while iv not really looked that hard, all the Uk law seems to refect that
5. Injunctions are

civil orders obtained from the County Court.

under EU law (iv not looked yet) it might be that it needs a high court judge ruling to keep it in place....

but you have to wonder how much type in the mainstream press a simple County Court Injunction against the 3 main ISP CEO's and COO's will get.... 75% of the whole UK Broadband market remember under(per-)Phorm.

the bank charges press coverage on overdrive perhaps

iv found lots of interesting information on the http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ternet-issues/ messageboard in the past, its been real slow for a while though.

it might be werth asking BankFodder
Administrator
The Consumer Action Group to see if he can give any legal tips in this growing UK ISP/Phorm fight and other related matters.

such as throttling,billing, unlawful charges etc if your looking to win other smaller battles for the ordinary users.

Popper, when it comes to injunctions against an individual/individuals then yes a county court most likely would be sufficient. We arent dealing with a case that only involves one or two people. We are talking about a case that would stop the UKs 3 largest Internet Providers from implementing new technology (phorm) that will affect millions of customers.

I arent a lawyer but common sense tells me that most county courts most likely wouldnt have the authority to make a ruling on something that important. For example, taking the case of Judicial Reviews, my understanding is that those have to be heard in the High Court. County courts only deal with civil matters and given that a large part of the arguments underpinning any application for an injunction refer back to RIPA, which is a criminal law not civil, I really think it would have to end up in the High Court or maybe a High Court Judge sitting at a county court?

I really wish we had a lawyer here who could give concrete information and advice to Alexander and the rest of us on this. An injunction would be another great milestone in the fight against Phorm.

[popper]

yes, what you say makes perfect sense as regards RIPA and criminal law, and you may be right on reflection.

i guess its just a frame of mind really, i see companies no matter their size or global footprint as just a bunch of paper in a companies house office.

and its really just the people in these companies that infact get together to plan and profit and admitedly sign big contracts to pay and build the services we pay for.

i see people not companies, and its people that are just like you and me and subject to the exact same rules and laws, they might forget that in their high office, i dont, but perhaps thats just me!.