EU says to UK.Gov - BT-Phorm matter is not finished

icsys · 10-10-2008, 19:58

The European Commission has again written to the government for answers after the September 'missive' from Whitehall failed to address legal issues surrounding the past deployments of the Phorm ad technology, and they didn't provide details about how future rollouts will be regulated.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/10/eu_phorm_again/

Martin Selmayr, spokesman for commissioner Viviane Reding's Information Society and Media directorate-general told 'The Register' the UK had more questions to answer. "We wrote to them again on the 6th [of October]", he said. "For us the matter is not finished. Quite the contrary."

With still no evidence of the third BT trial having started, this should ruffle a few feathers at BT, BERR and the ICO

basa · 10-10-2008, 20:28

Hey c'mon mods, this is a Phorm thread which has been live for what, 30mins, and you've not closed it !!!!!

Cobbydaler · 10-10-2008, 20:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by basa

Hey c'mon mods, this is a Phorm thread which has been live for what, 30mins, and you've not closed it !!!!!

Please keep on topic.

Posts such as this are those which cause Phorm threads to degenerate to the point of closure.

Thank you.

Sirius · 10-10-2008, 21:48

I wonder if BT and Phorm got wind of this letter and that's why the 3rd trial has not seemingly started. ????

**Maggy J** · 10-10-2008, 23:40

I thought the trial was already underway?

Damien · 10-10-2008, 23:47

The EU needs to get tough and start enacting major privacy laws for communications, our government isn't going to do it. What with their 'database of all internet activities' plan.

Sirius · 11-10-2008, 06:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I thought the trial was already underway?

There has been no evidence what so ever that it has started .

**Maggy J** · 11-10-2008, 08:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

There has been no evidence what so ever that it has started .

Just the announcement that it was about to start in September?But no BT customers posting here has seen any sign thus far?

downquark1 · 11-10-2008, 08:47

Conflicting feelings.... EU Busy bodying being put to good use...... /explodes

icsys · 11-10-2008, 16:14

A couple of theories regarding the elusive 'latest BT trial'

1 - BT were contaced by the EU and told to hold off on any trials until answers to a second letter to UK gov, sent on the 6th, are received. (Meaning trials delayed until at least Nov 6th).

2 - BT have experienced technical problems and no invites have actually been sent out yet.

3 - BT sent out the invitations but nobody has accepted them (unlikely as no one has posted that they actually received an invite).

4 - BT sent out no invites at all but are conducting the test in secret again.

It should be noted that BERR, the gov dep't that is meant to be giving the answers, say they have yet to receive the second EU letter.
No doubt stalling for time again!

cookie_365 · 12-10-2008, 12:11

Does anyone know what the EU's powers here actually are?

icsys · 12-10-2008, 21:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Does anyone know what the EU's powers here actually are?

Powers are outlined in Articles 211â€“219 of the EC treaty.
Once legislation is passed by the Council and Parliament, it is the Commission's responsibility to ensure it is implemented. It does this through the member states or through its agencies.
In particular the Commission has a duty to ensure the treaties and law are upheld, potentially by taking member states or other institutions to the Court of Justice in a dispute.

It is the responsibility of the Court of Justice to ensure that the law is observed in the interpretation and application of the Treaties of the European Union and of the provisions laid down by the competent Community institutions.

The commencement of proceedings before the Court of Justice is preceded by a preliminary procedure conducted by the Commission, which gives the Member State the opportunity to reply to the complaints against it. If that procedure does not result in termination of the failure by the Member State, an action for breach of Community law may be brought before the Court of Justice.
That action may be brought by the Commission â€“ as is practically always the case â€“ or by another Member State. If the Court finds that an obligation has not been fulfilled, the Member State concerned must terminate the breach without delay.
If, after new proceedings are initiated by the Commission, the Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgement, it may, upon the request of the Commission, impose on the Member State a fixed or a periodic financial penalty.

cookie_365 · 18-10-2008, 07:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by icsys

Powers are outlined in Articles 211â€“219 of the EC treaty.
Once legislation is passed by the Council and Parliament, it is the Commission's responsibility to ensure it is implemented. It does this through the member states or through its agencies.
In particular the Commission has a duty to ensure the treaties and law are upheld, potentially by taking member states or other institutions to the Court of Justice in a dispute.

It is the responsibility of the Court of Justice to ensure that the law is observed in the interpretation and application of the Treaties of the European Union and of the provisions laid down by the competent Community institutions.

The commencement of proceedings before the Court of Justice is preceded by a preliminary procedure conducted by the Commission, which gives the Member State the opportunity to reply to the complaints against it. If that procedure does not result in termination of the failure by the Member State, an action for breach of Community law may be brought before the Court of Justice.
That action may be brought by the Commission â€“ as is practically always the case â€“ or by another Member State. If the Court finds that an obligation has not been fulfilled, the Member State concerned must terminate the breach without delay.
If, after new proceedings are initiated by the Commission, the Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgement, it may, upon the request of the Commission, impose on the Member State a fixed or a periodic financial penalty.

Good response

Alien · 24-10-2008, 12:02

This is sort of related to the whole Phorm/privacy thing, so thought I'd post it in here instead of starting a new thread.

Australian Tech Could Turn U.S. ISPs into Kiddie Porn Cops
As a few of the comments to that article mention, it may be aimed at 1 type of activity pretty much anyone will be against, but it's blatantly obvious it could be [ab]used for a lot more. The words "slippery slope" spring to mind.

Edit: I know it says "US ISPs", but the company tried to flog it to Australian ISPs & they all said no, which is when they started pitching it to US ISPs. How long before they start pitching it to UK ISPs?