I recently tweeted about the fact 118 800′s website was conveniently down not allowing me to unsubscribe from the controversial mobile phone directory being set up in the UK. What annoys me and many others is that 118 800 never asked my permission to use my data in the first place and alot of people feel this should be an opt-in directory not an opt-out.
I recieved a reply from a fellow tweeter @SkippyUK informing me of a phone number I could call and a contact name of a employee who could remove my data from the directory not just make me ex-directory. I felt as a fellow member of the Internet community I should share this information as we all have a right to have our data protected and removed from any list. However it seems 118 800 were not too happy with this information leaking out and I’ve received a email from their PR company (Biss Lancaster) who in my humble opinion have just generated a whole load more bad publicity for 118 800. It reads as follows:
Subject: Your post on 118800
Message: Could you pleas remove the telephone number of <removed name>
from 118800 from your recent blog post. We’ve been in touch with
“Skippy” on Twitter.
If anyone wishes to become ex-directory they should email
contact@118800.co.uk.
Thank you,
<removed for privacy>
Companies who go after bloggers have always generated a lot of bad feeling amongst the Internet generation and now it seems there are some companies who wish to stop tweeters from spreading information also. As an act of good faith I’ve removed the offending telephone number and names to respect privacy of these people in the hope someone from 118 800 replies to this post with a few answers to some questions which address concerns a lot of people have over their service.
1. If we become ex-directory will you still sell access to our details to other private companies? How do intend to stop companies abusing your service.
2. How can we have our data completely removed from your service? If we can’t what are your reasons and justifications?
3. What steps have been taken to protect the contact details of children?
4. Why isn’t your service an opt in directory which gives the individual the option of being apart of your service?
5. Why is a directory enquiry service asking people to remove their telephone contact details? Doesn’t this defeat the object of your service?
6. Who is your data protection officer and what are their contact details?
7. What are you going to do about the website scalability problems which have prevented many users from becoming ex-directory?
We’d love to hear from you 118 800 so please get in touch!
And heres my direct email to 118800′s PR firm:
Dear Sir,
You recently contacted me and asked me to remove 118800′s phone number from my site. I’ve complied with your request as an act of good faith towards you and your client. However I’d like to invite 118800 to answer a few questions which currently concern a lot of internet users who read my blog. The open letter can be found here:
http://dev.squarecows.com/2009/07/14/an-open-letter-to-118800/
We’d love to hear from you and hopefully you’ll be able to alleviate some of our concerns, and inform us of how we can best protect our data, rather than users having to find out the information themselves.
Regards
Richard Harvey
~~~~~~~~~~~
http://dev.squarecows.co
118800 doesn’t sell data .. not would they have a legal basis for doing so.
Not sure why they demanded you remove the 118800 representatives data .. they are public and on the net .. so what legal basis did they make such a demand. Check out 123people.co.uk for details of Shona Forster (now they can ask you to remove her name as she has taken steps to make her name and role public – e.g. appearing on BBC)
The fact is that everyone has the right to ask 118800 – free of charge -to verify if the company is holding their personal data for the purposes of the directory and either to have that data corrected or withdrawn (essentially removed). This is under regulation 18(5) of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003. The same regs (18) also require the party collecting your data for the purposes of a directory to make you aware of this intention and to give you and opportunity to determine if you wanted an entry or not. This is also required under the Data Protection Act 1998.
readers may be interested in this letter from the Assistant Information Commissioner Phl Jones to the MP John F Spellar concerning the ICOs involvement with Connectivity. http://iwc2.labouronline.org/165135/uploads/9beb0cbc-366a-f264-f9d1-d499a6b5dc24.pdf or http://tweetmeme.com/bar/110974930
People should ask the ICO why it’s taken them nearly two years of engagement with connectivity to demand evidence of compliance!
Watch this space apparently we are going to get some answers:
“Hi Richard
Thanks for removing the details. The reason for asking her phone number to be removed is simply because people calling that number would only be told by the receptionist to email to be removed anyway (so saving them a cost of a wasted phonecall if nothing else).
I should be able to help you with most of your questions, leave it with me and I’ll get back to you shortly.
Best wishes, ”
Please note no alternative number has been offered yet! But At least its a step forward in the right direction.
Ric
Here’s a good video featuring 118800 CEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZDgReCkzXI&feature=fvsr