Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
The discussion seems to be descending into personal attacks which is regrettable. Surely an intelligent person doesn't need to resort to that sort of thing? Wouldn't it be better for us all to stick to the topic rather than go for the person? It looks like the useful part of this thread is over.
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
Breaking the law is indeed breaking the law, however you have not demonstrated that the law has been broken. I'd be quite happy to make an argument that website content caching is a 'permitted act' under either section 31 (incidental inclusion) or section 72 (free public showing of a broadcast) of the UK CDPA. |
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Just to try and get back on topic if possible:
The C/F terms and conditions say the following: http://www.cableforum.co.uk/about/21...and-conditions Quote:
And if they didn't? For example if someone, did any of the following: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And if they kept doing it, no matter how much you told them to stop? I'm just using this site's T&Cs as an example of a website asserting it's right to control access and use. I'm not citing the examples above and saying that the TalkTalk system breaks those particular terms. My experience has been that C/F tend to take a fairly robust attitude to enforcement of their T&C's. As do other websites. |
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
If someone breaches our T&Cs, they get warned. If they do it repeatedly, they get 'banned' - that is, their posting rights are permanently revoked and we actively seek to prevent them from re-registering. What we don't do is attempt to prevent them from accessing all those parts of the site which are publicly viewable without registration.
The fact that a website is published means that the publisher implicitly accepts that certain things may be done with it. The question here is whether the creation of user accounts with additional privileges is analogous to the use of certain lines of code to attempt to control the behviour of other, automated internet systems. Our membership system requires active human involvement and specific agreement to a set of conditions, in order to gain access to parts of the site that are inaccessible otherwise. I don't see that as being much of a comparison with a line of code that asks a spider or other web cataloguing system not to record certain content when that content is visible and not protected by any password. Of course, you might then want to argue that the code in question amounts to a password protection against web-crawling systems, and that by ignoring it, the operator of that system is effectively 'hacking' your site. Personally I can't see a judge going for that. |
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
Quote:
Some of your comments above suggest you are not aware of the basics of the dispute between certain websites and TalkTalk. I suggest that you read it all up again, because the things you are saying above, clearly indicate some mistaken assumptions about the actions certain website owners are taking. Especially when you make reference to what judges might or might not "go for". The TalkTalk members forum should give you a grasp of the basics and it is available to all to read. Another hypothetical question - how often and how comprehensively does your C/F site get scraped? If I was to use - say - the firefox addon Scrapbook Plus to download the content of the entire C/F site, twice a day? Using a dedicated server and a nice big fat terrabyte level hard drive? What would you do about that? Let's assume for the sake of argument that I was not a member of C/F - just a commercial operator, compiling a marketing or malware database for which your site's content was a valuable component. Any comparison to any actual scraping exercise carried out by any particular company is of course, entirely accidental. Or if I got tired of the screen scraping, and decided on a DdoS attack instead. Would you act to prevent that sort of abuse? I suspect the point would come at which you would enforce your rights. How? Website owners have rights. They set Terms and Conditions. They notify those Terms and Conditions. Others can abide by them or not access the sites. I think the way C/F cleverly puts it is like this: Quote:
TalkTalk are of course free to NOT visit my site, NOT to scrape it, NOT download material from it, or NOT impersonate their customers while visiting it. I've told them that very very clearly. It's a very simple point but one they are struggling to grasp - and they don't seem to be the only ones. |
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
The US instinctively understand that isps are in a position of responsibility which is easily capable of being abused. It is one thing to ignore the privacy of individuals but by doing that en masse an isp can profile other online businesses merely by data analysis of ingoing and outgoing traffic of individuals.
What happens when a large multinational conglomerate (possibly foreign owned) acquires an isp and starts analysing traffic to UK competitors businessess? Online businessess have to cry foul to the UK government till a rigorous set of laws are made regarding isp activities and these laws are properly policed and properly enforced. |
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Further information on the ICO involvement so far on this issue is here http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...ncoming-111620 and http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...alk%20talk.pdf http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...e%20tt.pdf.pdf Seems to be something of a slap on the wrist for TalkTalk from the ICO and it is ongoing.
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Quote:
And from the whatdotheyknow website Quote:
|
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
....but, but ....
The information hasn't been republished in full, it's been linked to, which is the established way of complying with copyright laws on the 'net. (Even the Daily Mail fan-boys do that) |
Re: TalkTalk tracking you, phorm?
Strange - it looked to me as if whatdotheyknow were publishing it in full........
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:48. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.