BT 2006 trials of Phorm
Alexander Hanff
ukcrypto at chiark.greenend.org.uk
Sat, 7 Jun 2008 00:16:35 +0100
------=_Part_6479_1055727.1212794195538
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Mr Bohm and Dr Clayton,
Can I ask if either of you have received legal threats from BT with regards
your comments about the legality of the covert trials and future plans to
deploy Phorm?
I ask because Emma Sanderson has today accused me of defamation for the
section of my blog post regarding whether or not BT may have misled ICO by
stating no ads were served during the trial and that no IP data was shared
with Phorm.
Now on my blog I have asked it as a question and then given my opinion and
thoughts on the issue, so I fail to see how this is defamation; but I am
interested in the fact that BT seem to be concentrating legal efforts on me
yet don't appear to using the same tactics with other commentators who have
publicly stated in the press and elsewhere that they believe BT's actions
were illegal.
It feels to me as though BT are attempting to menace me into backing out
from the Phorm debate.
Alexander Hanff
2008/6/6 Nicholas Bohm <nbohm@ernest.net>:
> Brian Morrison wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 10:50:57 +0100
>> Ian Batten <igb@batten.eu.org> wrote:
>>
>> If Phorm/BT can turn this into a debate about the critics, and not about
>>> what is being criticised, they win. A bunch of IT geeks cuts a similar
>>> figure to some vegan environmental protesters: amiable eccentrics, who the
>>> man in the street doesn't really listen to.
>>>
>>
>> This and the rest of your arguments make enormous sense Ian, and I'm
>> afraid that I can see your point only too well.
>>
>> It seems to me that the real problem is that as a nation we have become
>> accepting of the constant stream of official monitoring that happens
>> now, and a lot of people that I have spoken to seem to personally view
>> it as acceptable. They don't appear to see the difference between
>> Phorm's business model and the actions of LEAs seeking to identify
>> miscreants of one sort and another. But most often their argument is of
>> the "well that's how it is and we can't change it" variety.
>>
>> Most people that know me will roll their eyes as soon as an issue of
>> this nature comes up in conversation, "Oh oh, Brian will be off on one
>> of his rants again" they say, and proceed to smile about it rather than
>> listen.
>>
>> I'm getting seriously discouraged from trying to make people aware of
>> what they've done to themselves by abdicating responsibility for what
>> is done in their name.
>>
>> If I could emigrate to somewhere I believed would be any better I would
>> have gone ten years ago. But I don't believe there is anywhere really,
>> even the places that Statewatch thinks are still libertarian.
>>
>> Until the human race decides it needs to raise the rights of the
>> individual back to where they belong I don't see this changing.
>>
>
> Ian is certainly right that a lot of people put a low price on their
> privacy, or are not very sensitive about what information they need to keep
> private in order to protect their privacy.
>
> The ACLU did a neat job of illustrating the point:
>
> http://www.aclu.org/pizza/
>
> I often point people to this, and find their views altered by it.
>
> Nicholas
> --
> Salkyns, Great Canfield, Takeley,
> Bishop's Stortford CM22 6SX, UK
>
> Phone 01279 870285 (+44 1279 870285)
> Mobile 07715 419728 (+44 7715 419728)
>
> PGP public key ID: 0x899DD7FF. Fingerprint:
> 5248 1320 B42E 84FC 1E8B A9E6 0912 AE66 899D D7FF
>
>
------=_Part_6479_1055727.1212794195538
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Mr Bohm and Dr Clayton,<br><br>Can I ask if either of you have received legal threats from BT with regards your comments about the legality of the covert trials and future plans to deploy Phorm?<br><br>I ask because Emma Sanderson has today accused me of defamation for the section of my blog post regarding whether or not BT may have misled ICO by stating no ads were served during the trial and that no IP data was shared with Phorm.<br>
<br>Now on my blog I have asked it as a question and then given my opinion and thoughts on the issue, so I fail to see how this is defamation; but I am interested in the fact that BT seem to be concentrating legal efforts on me yet don't appear to using the same tactics with other commentators who have publicly stated in the press and elsewhere that they believe BT's actions were illegal.<br>
<br>It feels to me as though BT are attempting to menace me into backing out from the Phorm debate.<br><br>Alexander Hanff<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/6/6 Nicholas Bohm <<a href="mailto:nbohm@ernest.net">nbohm@ernest.net</a>>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">Brian Morrison wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 10:50:57 +0100<br>
Ian Batten <<a href="mailto:igb@batten.eu.org" target="_blank">igb@batten.eu.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
If Phorm/BT can turn this into a debate about the critics, and not about what is being criticised, they win. A bunch of IT geeks cuts a similar figure to some vegan environmental protesters: amiable eccentrics, who the man in the street doesn't really listen to.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
This and the rest of your arguments make enormous sense Ian, and I'm<br>
afraid that I can see your point only too well.<br>
<br>
It seems to me that the real problem is that as a nation we have become<br>
accepting of the constant stream of official monitoring that happens<br>
now, and a lot of people that I have spoken to seem to personally view<br>
it as acceptable. They don't appear to see the difference between<br>
Phorm's business model and the actions of LEAs seeking to identify<br>
miscreants of one sort and another. But most often their argument is of<br>
the "well that's how it is and we can't change it" variety.<br>
<br>
Most people that know me will roll their eyes as soon as an issue of<br>
this nature comes up in conversation, "Oh oh, Brian will be off on one<br>
of his rants again" they say, and proceed to smile about it rather than<br>
listen.<br>
<br>
I'm getting seriously discouraged from trying to make people aware of<br>
what they've done to themselves by abdicating responsibility for what<br>
is done in their name.<br>
<br>
If I could emigrate to somewhere I believed would be any better I would<br>
have gone ten years ago. But I don't believe there is anywhere really,<br>
even the places that Statewatch thinks are still libertarian.<br>
<br>
Until the human race decides it needs to raise the rights of the<br>
individual back to where they belong I don't see this changing.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
Ian is certainly right that a lot of people put a low price on their privacy, or are not very sensitive about what information they need to keep private in order to protect their privacy.<br>
<br>
The ACLU did a neat job of illustrating the point:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.aclu.org/pizza/" target="_blank">http://www.aclu.org/pizza/</a><br>
<br>
I often point people to this, and find their views altered by it.<br>
<br>
Nicholas<br>
-- <br>
Salkyns, Great Canfield, Takeley,<br>
Bishop's Stortford CM22 6SX, UK<br>
<br>
Phone 01279 870285 (+44 1279 870285)<br>
Mobile 07715 419728 (+44 7715 419728)<br>
<br>
PGP public key ID: 0x899DD7FF. Fingerprint:<br>
5248 1320 B42E 84FC 1E8B A9E6 0912 AE66 899D D7FF<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_6479_1055727.1212794195538--