[LINK] Phorm's advertising system

[Rick Welykochy]

Roger Clarke wrote:

> FIPR Press Release
> For Immediate Release: Monday 17th March 2008
> Open Letter to the IC on the legality of Phorm's advertising system
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR) has today released
> the text of an open letter to Richard Thomas, the Information
> Commissioner (IC) on the legality of Phorm Inc's proposal to provide
> targeted advertising by snooping on Internet users' web browsing.

Which raises the interesting question: Would this kind of ISp-based
(or any-based) traffic and content analysis be illegal in Australia?


> Said Richard Clayton, Treasurer, FIPR:
>     "The Phorm system is highly intrusive -- it's like the Post Office
>     opening all my letters to see what I'm interested in, merely so that
>     I can be sent a better class of junk mail. Not surprisingly, when
>     you look closely, this activity turns out to be illegal. We hope
>     that the Information Commissioner will take careful note of our
>     analysis when he expresses his opinion upon the scheme."

An interesting analogy that should hold some water. If emails are now
admissible as evidence, just as snail mail, should the sanctity of
email privacy be protected just like snail mail? Without such protection,
it is far easier to doctor email to frame evidence against an individual.


cheers
rickw



-- 
________________________________________________________________
Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services || Internet Driving Instructor

Filling the tank of an SUV with ethanol requires enough
corn to feed a person for a year.
      -- The Economist: "The end of cheap food"