[ORG-action] Block Phorm

This week, we raised the pressure on Phorm, by asking major websites to
block Phorm from intercepting their data.

We’ve yet to have a firm decision from many of these sites – Facebook,
MSN, Google, Youtube, AOL, Yahoo, Amazon and Ebay. But others, including
several major sites, have already agreed to block Phorm. Find out more
about this on the blog next week.

Right now, we need to pile on the pressure. Once sites start blocking
Phorm, more people will understand that the concerns are real, and Phorm
can be stopped.

== Take Action ==

1 If you’re on Facebook, join the group: http://www.facebook.com/
group.php?gid=56045061126

2 Blog about it! Tweet the FB link – get the message out to your friends.

3 Block Phorm: opt your website out, and let us know by emailing
(E-Mail Removed)

4 Email your favourite sites. Make the emails FAO Chief Privacy Officer.
Take the text from our standard letter here: http://
www.openrightsgroup.org/block-phorm-letter/

Want to support our work? We're funded by technologists who care for
digital rights. Please donate via http://www.openrightsgroup.org/support-
org/

--
http://www.nodpi.org

In uk.telecom Eddie R <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> 3 Block Phorm: opt your website out

I'm not sure of the relevance of this posting to uk.t, but how would
one go about blocking phorm from one's website anyway?

Chris

"Eddie R" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> This week, we raised the pressure on Phorm, by asking major websites to
> block Phorm from intercepting their data.
>
> We've yet to have a firm decision from many of these sites - Facebook,
> MSN, Google, Youtube, AOL, Yahoo, Amazon and Ebay. But others, including
> several major sites, have already agreed to block Phorm. Find out more
> about this on the blog next week.
>

Can you name the major sites that have agreed to block data?
I think you're fighting a losing battle as money is involved. The
companies will not turn down extra revenue. I don't have time
to read pages of information, so just name the sites. If they have
agreed then there will be no problem with you doing so.

If you do not like PHORM, move to another ISP, if everyone
that ws unhappy with PHORM did something about it, the
ISP would go out of business.


> Right now, we need to pile on the pressure. Once sites start blocking
> Phorm, more people will understand that the concerns are real, and Phorm
> can be stopped.
>
> == Take Action ==
>

I could say the same to you. After a year of campaigns there has been NO
media coverage, no one attending meetings and no other alternative way
provided by you of how the ISP will raise the money lost by not taking part.

> Want to support our work? We're funded by technologists who care for
> digital rights. Please donate via http://www.openrightsgroup.org/support-
> org/
>

I would NOT advise giving money to that group.

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

"Chris Davies" <chris-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> In uk.telecom Eddie R <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> 3 Block Phorm: opt your website out
>
> I'm not sure of the relevance of this posting to uk.t, but how would
> one go about blocking phorm from one's website anyway?
>
> Chris

The main problem is that he doesn't understand HOW it works, so is using
scare tactics, incorrect terminology and can't even name one web site that
has sent him a written agreement that they will not take part in PHORM.

It reminds me of some sort of activist or trouble maker that wants to cause
trouble and goes out looking for something to pick on.

Responding to Clive:

> "Eddie R" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> This week, we raised the pressure on Phorm, by asking major websites to
>> block Phorm from intercepting their data.
>>
>> We've yet to have a firm decision from many of these sites - Facebook,
>> MSN, Google, Youtube, AOL, Yahoo, Amazon and Ebay. But others,
>> including several major sites, have already agreed to block Phorm. Find
>> out more about this on the blog next week.
>>
>>
> Can you name the major sites that have agreed to block data? I think
> you're fighting a losing battle as money is involved. The companies
> will not turn down extra revenue. I don't have time to read pages of
> information, so just name the sites. If they have agreed then there
> will be no problem with you doing so.
>
> If you do not like PHORM, move to another ISP, if everyone that ws
> unhappy with PHORM did something about it, the ISP would go out of
> business.
>


Thats not how this is shaping up to work.

If it gets off the ground, it will become a standard operation across all
ISPs. Getting rid of something like this once its become established will
be impossible. (Then comes Web-2, Web-3, and finally, only semi-
interactive "Starship Troopers" TV, and nostalgia for "the good old
days". Do you want to know more?)

Now is the time we will look back on and say "Why didn't we do something
about this back then when we had a chance?"

For most people, the only option they have at this stage is to make noise
about it, but this in itself, if the noise is loud enough and maintained,
provides a backdrop (and fuels a media-food "controversy") for someone in
a position of influence to do something about it if they can see how much
support they will gain.

This is already happening, but not effectively enough yet.

Spread the word. Its at least a "something" to do.

--
*===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/
*===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
*===( http://www.slackware.com/

> If you do not like PHORM, move to another ISP, if everyone that ws
> unhappy with PHORM did something about it, the ISP would go out of
> business.

In uk.telecom Mike Jones <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Thats not how this is shaping up to work.

OK. So can I have some answers to the questions,
please? If you can't convince a technically literate
already-not-exactly-enamoured-of-phorm-but-my-isp-doesn't-use-it person
like me, how on earth will you convince sceptics?

Chris

On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 13:32:07 +0000, Clive wrote:

>
> "Eddie R" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> This week, we raised the pressure on Phorm, by asking major websites to
>> block Phorm from intercepting their data.
>>
>> We've yet to have a firm decision from many of these sites - Facebook,
>> MSN, Google, Youtube, AOL, Yahoo, Amazon and Ebay. But others, including
>> several major sites, have already agreed to block Phorm. Find out more
>> about this on the blog next week.
>>
>>
> Can you name the major sites that have agreed to block data? I think
> you're fighting a losing battle as money is involved. The companies will
> not turn down extra revenue. I don't have time to read pages of
> information, so just name the sites. If they have agreed then there will
> be no problem with you doing so.
>
> If you do not like PHORM, move to another ISP, if everyone that ws unhappy
> with PHORM did something about it, the ISP would go out of business.
>
>
>> Right now, we need to pile on the pressure. Once sites start blocking
>> Phorm, more people will understand that the concerns are real, and Phorm
>> can be stopped.
>>
>> == Take Action ==
>>
>>
> I could say the same to you. After a year of campaigns there has been NO
> media coverage, no one attending meetings and no other alternative way
> provided by you of how the ISP will raise the money lost by not taking
> part.

They don't have the money yet so it's not lost money. It's potentially
unearned money. If we don't like them earning money in that particular
manner we can object and we don't have to provide alternatives. It's like
being asked to give a thief money for lost income because we have
installed burglar alarms. If we do not agree with the despicable behaviour
of money grubbing entities we will not provide an alternative - are you
mad?

>
>> Want to support our work? We're funded by technologists who care for
>> digital rights. Please donate via
>> http://www.openrightsgroup.org/support- org/
>>
>>
> I would NOT advise giving money to that group.
>
>> --
>> http://www.nodpi.org

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:40:24 +0000, Chris Davies wrote:

> In uk.telecom Eddie R <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> 3 Block Phorm: opt your website out
>
> I'm not sure of the relevance of this posting to uk.t, but how would one
> go about blocking phorm from one's website anyway?
>
> Chris

There are a few anti-phorm websites with information on this subject. I
have also come across one or two websites which employ js to detect and
resolve the browser's ISP and if it is part of the group actively
considering phorm then the website sends a page telling the user about it
and why it may potentially block them from access in the future.

Responding to Chris Davies:

>> If you do not like PHORM, move to another ISP, if everyone that ws
>> unhappy with PHORM did something about it, the ISP would go out of
>> business.
>
> In uk.telecom Mike Jones <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Thats not how this is shaping up to work.
>
> OK. So can I have some answers to the questions, please? If you can't
> convince a technically literate
> already-not-exactly-enamoured-of-phorm-but-my-isp-doesn't-use-it person
> like me, how on earth will you convince sceptics?
>
> Chris


Not my job to "convince sceptics".

You've got the heads-up, decide for yourself what you do next.

Google is, if not your friend, at least useful.

ixquick.com looks better, and try reading up on the current bank of info
on theregister.com.

Hand holding is not available a this time. Da Management.

--
*===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/
*===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
*===( http://www.slackware.com/

In uk.telecom Mike Jones <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Not my job to "convince sceptics".
> You've got the heads-up, decide for yourself what you do next.

So how will website owners become convinced to block Phorm if you refuse
to convince them?


> Google is, if not your friend, at least useful.

Consider me a sceptic. Why should I bother to search google for something
that doesn't affect me personally?


> Hand holding is not available a this time. Da Management.

I suspect it's going to be tricky to gather momentum for a cause you're
clearly not prepared to support.

Chris