Tuesday 17 June 2014

Guess who did not notify or pay the fee?

An anonymous comment, left on one of our posts below, caught our eye and needs more prominence.
Anonymous1/6/14 14:18
Perhaps it may aid your case if ATVOD were questioned on why the did not register with the Information Commisioners Office until 28th September 2013.
It would appear that they held data illegally for almost 3 1/2 years.
If so, then passing on information they held to OFCOM may too have been against the law?
It seems that ATVOD, who go about collecting personal data on individuals and publishing it along with their "determinations" that someone has failed to notify them or paid them a fee, had themselves failed to notify the Information Commissioner of its personal data processing. Neither had it paid the fee to be registered. What's more, when ATVOD belatedly registered in September last year, following complaints, they completely failed to provide the information they are obliged to. ATVOD's listing states that the purpose of their collecting private data about you is, "to enable us to promote our goods and services".  They must mean their exciting new range of ATVOD blindfolds and earplugs,  specially crafted to protect teenagers from discovering that they weren't found in the gooseberry patch or brought by the stork.


We look forward to the Information Commissioner's Office taking decisive action. But don't hold your breath. When we asked for confirmation that last September was the date of ATVOD's first registration, we were told that the ICO cannot comment because that would break the Data Protection Act.

7 comments:

  1. Indigo Mancini19/6/14 16:39

    Interesting, so how does this effect all the personal data they published on their website prior to Sep 2013 ? For example, names of website owners and the communications they had with them ?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a question about the whole thing about licensing foreign porn site's, my question being can they. I know ATVOD want to make it a law, and I don't understand the law but I always thought that to licence something it had to have a base in that country. I mean I can still buy a product from an America website and that product will be sent to me by air mail but the site isn't licenced or taxed by the uk in anyway. so if we make a law saying we can licence a foreign porn site wouldn't that mean that other country's should legally be allowed to make licensing law's on thing's that aren't located in there country just because you can see or buy them on the internet. put simply, would it be illegal for the uk government to make any law licencing anything that does not have a base of operation's in the uk?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a bit off-topic. But briefly, ATVOD have been lobbying for a system whereby those moral paragons, the UK banks, should act as guardians of public morality by refusing payments to off-shore porn websites. That would probably raise all kinds of complicated issues to do with international financial settlements which I cannot comment on. The question I would ask is, does ATVOD have any business spending its resources on such matters?

      Delete
  3. sorry it was off-topic but I didn't know how else to ask, I only ask because one member of the house of lord's what's to licence foreign porn site's with imprisonment of up to 6 month's if they don't if the content can be seen in the uk (apparently it's fallen at the way-side but still on the table).
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2013-2014/0192/amend/pbc1921205m.2089-2095.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark,
      Your link to the proposed amendment to the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill moved by Helen Goodman MP demonstrates just how batty some people are. Ms Goodman is doing a good job of representing battiness in Parliament. As your query implies it is plain bonkers to attempt to impose licensing on the citizens of a foreign jurisdiction because it would be unenforceable. I do see that this is Ms Goodman's idea of spreading ATVOD to the entire Solar System. Fortunately Parliament is very unlikely to pass such a clause. And even if it did it would be a totally futile gesture. The lesson to be derived from this is, be very careful who you vote for.

      Delete
  4. thank you for clarifying, I feel I should point out if you didn't know that the "online safety bill" has been re-introduced this time with ATVOD in mind.
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2014-2015/0016/en/15016en.htm

    also according to ATVOD's own minute's they are interested in taking the job of the IWF, and since ATVOD believe that any pornographic material being freely available on the internet is illegal then I would not trust them with that job.
    http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/me_atvod_14b.htm#Internet_censors_look_forward_to_more_jobs_7561

    ReplyDelete
  5. sorry to be off-topic again but I just read this.
    http://www.xbiz.com/news/182156
    I wanted to know how likely is it that the European commission will take ATVOD's view and also if they don't do what ATVOD say's what's likely to happen to ATVOD now they know they've do thing's the way they have?
    bare in mind that in Denmark the age at which you can watch porn is 15 not 18.

    ReplyDelete