The European Commission (EC) has officially closed its internet privacy infringement case against the UK, which was launched in April 2009. The case followed concerns about a company called Phorm and its ability to monitor what websites broadband ISP customers were visiting for use in targeted advertising campaigns.Phorm's service, which was initially trialled without customers consent by BT Retail, controversially used Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) technology in a way that many likened to Spyware. The firm was eventually forced to abandon its UK plans after a swathe of negative publicity made the service too hot for ISPs to handle.
At the same time Europe launched a related case against the UK for failing to fully implement its internet and email privacy rules (ePrivacy Directive 2002/58/EC and Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC). Last year the UK amended its national legislation (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000) so as to prevent interception of users' electronic communications without their "explicit consent" (detailed here).
European Commission Statement
The European Commission has closed an infringement case against the UK in recognition that UK national legislation has now been changed to properly implement EU rules on ePrivacy and data protection on the confidentiality of communications such as email or Internet browsing. The Commission believes UK law and institutions are now well-equipped to enforce the privacy rights of UK users.
The Commission opened this infringement procedure in April 2009 (IP/09/570), because UK Internet users were concerned about how the UK authorities had handled their complaints over the use of targeted behavioural advertising by several Internet service providers.
The European Commission has closed an infringement case against the UK in recognition that UK national legislation has now been changed to properly implement EU rules on ePrivacy and data protection on the confidentiality of communications such as email or Internet browsing. The Commission believes UK law and institutions are now well-equipped to enforce the privacy rights of UK users.
The Commission opened this infringement procedure in April 2009 (IP/09/570), because UK Internet users were concerned about how the UK authorities had handled their complaints over the use of targeted behavioural advertising by several Internet service providers.
The UK's new rules also established an additional sanction and supervisory mechanism to deal with breaches of confidentiality in electronic communications, yet it should be said that the amended rules have made an exception for network management purposes (e.g. Traffic Management, anti-spam systems etc.); this is partly what seems to get TalkTalk's sometimes controversial HomeSafe service (here) off the hook.
Tweet
Comments: 5
Bob2002Posted: 27 January, 2012 - 11:10 AM
Link to comment
Talking of anti-Phorm ... congratulations to Alexander Hanff whose wife has just (yesterday according to Twitter) given birth to a daughter.
sentup.custardPosted: 27 January, 2012 - 1:17 PM
Link to comment
"UK law and institutions are now well-equipped to enforce the privacy rights of UK users."
Being "well-equipped" to do the job and actually bothering to do it are two different things, of course.
Various government departments and supposed watchdogs have consistently fudged the issue and come up with spurious reasons to do absolutely nothing, because we are talking about the protection of the rights of ordinary citizens here, not big business, and they have made it very clear that they couldn't really give a toss about the ordinary citizen.
An optimist might think that leopards change their spots...
Gordon
Telecom EngineerPosted: 27 January, 2012 - 8:53 PM
Link to comment
Phorm is evil pure and simple. Explicit consent? Will that be under some terms and condition small print?
I have no issue with QoS.
Cleanfeed for protection of children is great.
Spying on my traffic to sell it to others - no way!
timelessPosted: 27 January, 2012 - 10:06 PM
Link to comment
l agree with the user who made the above statement, however while l do agree with the ideas even systems like Cleanfeed can be open to abuse..
essentially any software creates logs, and it wouldnt take much for it to be twisted slightly or used in such a way..
Carrot63Posted: 28 January, 2012 - 12:32 AM
Link to comment
The one lesson to be learned from the way the Phorm debacle played out is that no British government will lift a finger to protect the interests of those who elected it, but will instead defer to the whims of business every time. With the exception of a couple of parliamentarians only Alex Hanff, Richard Clayton and occasionally the EU walk away with any honour at all - great credit to Alex that it was stopped. Privacy International should be ashamed of their initial response and take a long hard look at their ethics.
That it took so much concerted effort to put an end to something so obviously offensive should tell us all that the parasites will be back in droves and eventually, thansk to British government of any hue, they'll get what they want.
Generated in 0.58099 seconds.
DB queries: 8
Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).