header-logo header-logo

23 April 2009
Issue: 7366 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

Commission takes on UK privacy laws in Phorm action

UK authorities urged to change national laws after privacy infringement

The European Commission has launched an infringement proceeding against the UK after complaints by internet users against online advertising company Phorm.

The Commission alleges the UK failed to comply with EU e-privacy and personal data protection rules by allowing Phorm to track internet users’ web-surfing patterns to determine their interests and then deliver targeted advertising, without customers’ consent.

BT allowed Phorm to trial its services in 2006 and 2007, without informing customers.

EU telecoms commissioner Viviane Reding called on the UK authorities to “change their national laws and ensure that national authorities are duly empowered and have proper sanctions at their disposal”.

It is an offence to unlawfully intercept communications, but only where interception is “intentional”, and not if the interceptor has “reasonable grounds for believing” that consent to interception has been given.

Sarah Needham, solicitor at Macfarlanes LLP, says: “It is unclear whether the Phorm service contravenes EU or UK privacy laws.

“This is because they all revolve around a ‘consent’ regime without further detailing what is meant by this and whether this would include a clearly worded opt out regime,” she says.

One possibility, Needham says, is that the Phorm service may be “legitimised” if the user has consented to use of their data in this way, although EU and UK data protection laws are unclear on what this requires.

“The law is entirely clear that internet users must be told at the time their data is collected by ISPs what it will be used for.

“It seems that Phorm is planning on including this information as part of its launch. The best way for consumers to avoid unwanted Phorm activity is therefore to read privacy policies carefully,” she adds.

The Incorporated Society of British Advertisers wants the Commission to withdraw its legal challenge, saying selfregulation is the best way to address the issue.

The UK now has two months to reply. The Commission can then issue a reasoned opinion and, if still dissatisfied, refer the case to the European Court of Justice.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll