BadPhorm - When good ISPs go bad! :: Forums :: Phorm Discussion :: The Blogroll
 
<< Previous thread | Next thread >>
Phorm continue to sob that us whining privacy advocates are misrepresenting their system
Moderators: Jim Murray, narcosis, felixcatuk, Sammy
Author Post
narcosis
Mon Mar 31 2008, 04:29PM
Registered Member #39
Joined: Wed Feb 27 2008, 05:14PM
Posts: 241
 www.links.org by Ben Laurie
Back to top
Jim Murray
Mon Mar 31 2008, 06:07PM

Registered Member #1
Joined: Thu Feb 21 2008, 08:29PM
Posts: 141
 A little TOO like an expert for Phorm, obviously!

Jim.
Admin/press enquiries : [email protected]
Back to top
Oblonsky
Mon Mar 31 2008, 06:33PM
Registered Member #132
Joined: Sat Mar 08 2008, 10:59AM
Posts: 115
 Indeed Jim. I couldn't work out whether it was his expertise or his links to Google that frightened Phorm the most.
Back to top
serial
Mon Mar 31 2008, 09:53PM
Registered Member #100
Joined: Wed Mar 05 2008, 06:22PM
Posts: 177
 It is odd, especially as they haven't been asking people to sign NDA's. Their tech is patent pending, so I don't really see how a competitor like Google would be able to take advantage of an explanation of the patent/tech. This is just another indicator that you cannot trust Phorm.
Back to top
Oblonsky
Tue Apr 01 2008, 10:06AM
Registered Member #132
Joined: Sat Mar 08 2008, 10:59AM
Posts: 115
serial wrote ...

Their tech is patent pending, so I don't really see how a competitor like Google would be able to take advantage of an explanation of the patent/tech.


In order to be granted a patent in the UK one needs to show "inventive step". Also, because software patents and algortihms alone can't be patented in the UK, they also need to show that the claims of the patent are somehow observable/tangible in the physical world.

Just because it's pending doesn't mean it will be granted. It just means anyone else attempting to lodge disclosures to identical claims will be revoked.
Back to top
Cogster
Tue Apr 01 2008, 04:32PM
Registered Member #255
Joined: Wed Mar 26 2008, 05:52PM
Posts: 9
 Indeed.. I've seen countless bounced for refinement, re-explanation, addition of further prior art, modification of claims.. Unless its a done deal, its just a 'patent application'

saying that I dont think a proprietary position on technology will stop this lot.
never ever, bloody anything, bloody ever
Back to top
Jim Murray
Tue Apr 01 2008, 06:07PM

Registered Member #1
Joined: Thu Feb 21 2008, 08:29PM
Posts: 141
Cogster wrote ...
Indeed.. I've seen countless bounced for refinement, re-explanation, addition of further prior art, modification of claims.. Unless its a done deal, its just a 'patent application' saying that I dont think a proprietary position on technology will stop this lot.


No, but a serious lawsuit from Google might. I suspect that more than anything else is what's worrying Phorm, after all they (by their own admission) 'obtain search terms from GET submissions to known search engines' - Google might be just a little upset about that sort of hijacking.

Jim.

[ Edited Tue Apr 01 2008, 06:08PM ]
Admin/press enquiries : [email protected]
Back to top
Phormic Acid
Tue Apr 01 2008, 06:45PM

Registered Member #22
Joined: Mon Feb 25 2008, 11:11PM
Posts: 104
 Instead of a blacklist of websites containing information too sensitive to process and websites that have actively opted out, I propose the follow new whitelist to limit the chances of upsetting another company.

*.phorm.com
*.webwise.com
*.oix.com
*.bt.com
*.talktalk.co.uk
*.virginmedia.com
Back to top
 

Jump:     Back to top
Syndicate this thread: rss 0.92 Syndicate this thread: rss 2.0 Syndicate this thread: RDF
Powered by e107 Forum System