"We are not seeking compliance with the law as an end in itself,"

"submitted a proposal to Government in January of this year asking for a new offence to be created of recklessly or knowingly breaching data protection principles, which would be punishable by unlimited fines"

Or just more BS

"He also asked for the power to put an immediate stop to data processing by any organisation that he thought was "seriously unlawful".".

Hmmm? For a Muse, I wonder who would be sitting under that spotlight?

Parallel Thinking, dervheid?

And only Delve into Mass Technology and Innovation if you Think IT Apposite and Involved. ...... Press Ganged into Universal Service to Servers.

Data Protection issues and related technologies and processing methods are beyond the grasp of most business owners, never mind the man on the street. So if the ICO are not focussing on enforcement, who is? Who's looking out for the little guy who may be having his data illegally "pimped"?

Whilst I agre totally about the statement of reducing risk, the bit about NOT foccussin on enforcement makes the law reactive whereby companies only get punished when something goes wrong, because the only way I'm going to find out my data's been abused is possibly after a fraud is committed.

With that in mind, does it look like the ICO will see systems like Phorm's risky? I really hope the people at the ICO understand software.

Of course, the decision to actually bother to enforce the law wouldnt have anything to do with the size of the backhander or the political favours done by the guilty party, would it?

Not under our current squaky-clean corruption free government, surely....

So if you go to the police they say they're "sure higher bodies are dealing with this":

http://badphorm.co.uk/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1597

and if you go to ICO they're not interested in enforcing the law.

So that's OK then, isn't it. Obeying the law is clearly optional.

"We are not seeking compliance with the law as an end in itself,"

Translation - you dont have to comply with the law if you bribe us.

"we will need to devote proportionately more of our policy work to developments in the public sector than to developments in the private sector"

So they arent worried about Phorm?

"Some individuals value their privacy more than others"

Some pay more money than others. I'm betting Phorm pays a whole lot more than the consumer to the Buy the ICO a Private Island Fund.

Too true, sadly....

"Who's looking out for the little guy who may be having his data illegally "pimped"?"

Madame's Pimps that's Who, ..... Suppliers to the Royal Brothel/Harem.

"Next they may help you avoid personal data loss by telling you not to go online!" .... By Mr Anonymous Posted Wednesday 19th March 2008 12:24 GMT

It's the only sure way to curtail personal transfer but the Virtual MetaData remains as Purged Redundant Memory.

If you aint online, you aint Plugged in for Turning On to Tunes Way Out There.

If you AINT* online, urConnected.

* Advanced IntelAIgents Net Technology .... a NIRobotIQs Love Child which Grows Wild and Free and Strong.

The Pump is failing. Data is leaking everywhere -and clogged arteries an' All Gov! AINT IT time 42 Fix-It, Jimmy? Savile Row suits and White Lab coats in a flurry -Hurry!

Is there a doctor in the House questions? An xxxxAlien SPECialist would be just the Ticket to ride.

Can LOVE fix this one? Or is a by-pass needed? -Certainly life-support can only be a .tmp file Measure.