BT silences customers over Phorm

BT silences customers over Phorm
Down banhammer

By Chris Williams • Get more from this author

Posted in Telecoms, 19th November 2008 11:30 GMT


BT has banned all future discussion of Phorm and its "WebWise" targeted
advertising product on its customer forums, and deleted all past threads
about the controversy dating back to February.

Subscribers to BT's broadband packages had used the BT Beta forums to
criticise its relationship with Phorm and raise concerns about the
technical implications of ISPs wiretapping their customers. On Tuesday
however, BT decided it had had enough and posted this statement:

Our broadband support forums are designed to be a place where
customers can discuss technical support issues and offer solutions. To
ensure that the forums remain constructive we're tightening up our
moderation policies and will be deleting threads that don't provide
constructive support. For example, we have removed a number of forum
discussions about BT Webwise.

If you do want to find out more about BT Webwise, we provide lots of
information and the facility to contact us at www.bt.com/webwise. We hope
you'll continue to enjoy being part of the support community.

Full article here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11..._phorm_censor/

--
http://www.nodpi.org

"Eddie R" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> BT silences customers over Phorm
> Down banhammer
>
> By Chris Williams . Get more from this author
>
> Posted in Telecoms, 19th November 2008 11:30 GMT
>
>
> BT has banned all future discussion of Phorm and its "WebWise" targeted
> advertising product on its customer forums, and deleted all past threads
> about the controversy dating back to February.
>

Anyone unhappy has a choice to leave the company and go elsewhere.
Why do they choose not to?

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:25:14 +0000, Appollo wrote:

> Anyone unhappy has a choice to leave the company and go elsewhere. Why
> do they choose not to?

Actually, they don't. Some of them are stuck with BT under 12 or 18 month
contracts. Others have limited or no choice, as someone may be in an area
which is served by only a handful of ISPs, or the person is sharing a
connection with other people.

In any case, how is that relevant to BT silencing critics? Are you
excusing BT's behaviour by saying that the critics should simply go
elsewhere? Is complaining about a service you pay for not free-market
enough for some people? Should they all just shut up?

- Ed

--
http://www.nodpi.org

Appollo wrote:

> "Eddie R" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>
> > BT silences customers over Phorm
> > Down banhammer
> >
> > By Chris Williams . Get more from this author
> >
> > Posted in Telecoms, 19th November 2008 11:30 GMT
> >
> > BT has banned all future discussion of Phorm and its "WebWise" targeted
> > advertising product on its customer forums, and deleted all past threads
> > about the controversy dating back to February.
>
> Anyone unhappy has a choice to leave the company and go elsewhere.
> Why do they choose not to?

Inertia (read laziness) mostly.

Graham

Eddie R wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:25:14 +0000, Appollo wrote:
>
> > Anyone unhappy has a choice to leave the company and go elsewhere. Why
> > do they choose not to?
>
> Actually, they don't. Some of them are stuck with BT under 12 or 18 month
> contracts.

But haven't BT BROKEN the contract themselves ?

Graham

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:55:03 +0000, Eeyore wrote:

> But haven't BT BROKEN the contract themselves ?
>
> Graham

Indeed they have, but BT is arguing that they haven't, and
the people who attempt to leave will be told exactly that
by customer services.

It's a material change in contract, and they should be able
to get out. BT have denied it's a material change, and we've
heard several reports of customers being told they will face
a penalty for leaving early and will have to pay the remaining
about on their contract.

- Ed
--
http://www.nodpi.org

Eddie R wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:55:03 +0000, Eeyore wrote:
>
> > But haven't BT BROKEN the contract themselves ?
> >
> > Graham
>
> Indeed they have, but BT is arguing that they haven't, and
> the people who attempt to leave will be told exactly that
> by customer services.
>
> It's a material change in contract, and they should be able
> to get out. BT have denied it's a material change, and we've
> heard several reports of customers being told they will face
> a penalty for leaving early and will have to pay the remaining
> about on their contract.

Sounds like a case for Ofcom and / or Trading Standards.

Graham

kim wrote:

> Eeyore wrote:
> > Eddie R wrote:
> >> Eeyore wrote:
> >>
> >>> But haven't BT BROKEN the contract themselves ?
> >>
> >> Indeed they have, but BT is arguing that they haven't, and
> >> the people who attempt to leave will be told exactly that
> >> by customer services.
> >>
> >> It's a material change in contract, and they should be able
> >> to get out. BT have denied it's a material change, and we've
> >> heard several reports of customers being told they will face
> >> a penalty for leaving early and will have to pay the remaining
> >> about on their contract.
> >
> > Sounds like a case for Ofcom and / or Trading Standards.
>
> Yes, as if Ofcom give a damn!

But Trading Standards do !

I got a 'free' Saab 9000 once on their advice (misrepresentation) plus a
little shoving on my own part ! OK it was only £900 but they depreciate
fast. It never ever once packed up on me. One of the most reliable cars
I've ever had and the heated seats are a joy in winter.

Shame it's not local Offices any more not though. Seems only to be
regional. Give it a try though.

Graham

In uk.telecom Eddie R <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Actually, they don't. Some of them are stuck with BT under 12 or 18
> month contracts.

If there's no opt-out of Phorm I wonder whether that could be used as
a lever for cancelling a contract.


> Others have limited or no choice, as someone may be in an area
> which is served by only a handful of ISPs,

I'd be curious for you to describe anywhere in the UK that is "served
by only a handful of ISPs". Or is Phorm now being applied at the wholesale
level, rather than by BT Internet the (consumer) ISP?


> or the person is sharing a connection with other people.

Then it's up to the bill payer to decide.


> In any case, how is that relevant to BT silencing critics?

If the forums are for constructive support and complaints about Phorm
aren't constructive then BT is surely within its rights to moderate them
more strongly?

Whether doing so was the most sensible thing is another matter. Maybe
they should have created a new forum for the discussion of Phorm/Websise
and then blocked further discussion of it elsewhere. Fortunately I don't
need to worry. (Yet?)

Chris

"Chris Davies" <chris-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In uk.telecom Eddie R <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Actually, they don't. Some of them are stuck with BT under 12 or 18
>> month contracts.
>
> If there's no opt-out of Phorm I wonder whether that could be used as
> a lever for cancelling a contract.

BT say that it will be opt-in, so if you don't opt in you won't get
Phorm/Webwise (allegedly).

>> Others have limited or no choice, as someone may be in an area
>> which is served by only a handful of ISPs,
>
> I'd be curious for you to describe anywhere in the UK that is "served
> by only a handful of ISPs". Or is Phorm now being applied at the wholesale
> level, rather than by BT Internet the (consumer) ISP?

No it isn't applied at the wholesale level - only by BT
Broadband/Openworld/Internet to their retail customers.
And your comment is correct. If BT Broadband (via ADSL) is available on an
exchange, so are all other ISPs who use BT's ADSL backhaul service (most of
them).
So, it ain't a problem. Just go for a MAC and move to another ISP.

>
>
>> or the person is sharing a connection with other people.
>
> Then it's up to the bill payer to decide.
>
>
>> In any case, how is that relevant to BT silencing critics?
>
> If the forums are for constructive support and complaints about Phorm
> aren't constructive then BT is surely within its rights to moderate them
> more strongly?
>
> Whether doing so was the most sensible thing is another matter. Maybe
> they should have created a new forum for the discussion of Phorm/Websise
> and then blocked further discussion of it elsewhere. Fortunately I don't
> need to worry. (Yet?)

George