Longrider

Following on from this discussion, the Great Simpleton makes a point in the comments that warrants further exploration.

At first reading I was relaxed about this, not least because my name wasn’t on it. I also thought the process and cost would deter anyone from spamming. Furthermore , if they got the data legally as they claim then any other company could get it anyway.

However all may not be as it seems:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/12/connectivity_legal_threats/

The Register article refers to something of which I was partially aware; that Connectivity had approached O2 for access to their database of numbers and that O2, quite rightly in my opinion, had refused. What I did not know was that they had used the threat of legal action:

The company behind a controversial new directory of private mobile phone numbers threatened O2 with legal action when it refused to provide its customers’ personal details, The Register has learned.

Their reason being that there is a precedent:

…Connectivity told O2 it was legally required to hand over the data as landline companies are required to give data to home phone directories.

While we are used to our landline numbers being exposed in a directory unless we choose the ex-directory option, it is worth bearing in mind that it is something of a historical hangover. When the directory was first published, it was when the GPO owned the telephone system, so they were publishing in book form their own database – and, sales calls weren’t an issue.

Mobile phones have come about since then and have traditionally not been included in telephone directories. This custom and practice is what the service providers are referring to when they say that users regard their mobile numbers as private. Indeed, I would suggest that had the landline come about now, rather than a century ago, we would adopt a similar attitude to the numbers – that we, the users, decide who gets access, not some company trying to make a buck on the back of them.

Interestingly, Connectivity having been given a resounding “go forth and multiply” from the service providers backed away from legal threats:

Connectivity confirmed in a statement it had planned legal action to get access to operator data. “Exactly as all the landline directory services were entitled to request telephone number data from BT, 118800 is also legally entitled to request data from telecommunications companies,” it said.

“We began briefly to exercise this right and Ofcom was in the process of resolving the debate and carrying out a consultation. But this would have slowed down the delivery of the service so, having found alternative reliable sources of data, we decided not to pursue legal action.”

Presumably because they realised that they would not get the judgement they desired. Courts tend to take into account custom and practice when reaching judgements as I found out (nearly to my cost) a couple of decades back.

Ultimately, though, there is a question mark over Connectivity’s business plan. They intend to charge users £1 for access to a number – except that they do not give out the number. Who, I wonder will use the service in sufficient quantity to justify the venture capitalists’ investment in this business? One is inclined to reach the conclusion that it is the database that is worth so much money – and directory enquiries is merely the way in. And, while Connectivity do not propose at the moment to give out numbers, who can be sure that this will always be the case?

While you can opt out of their directory, by far the best option is not to be on it in the first place. It is good, therefore, to note that O2, Orange et al had the cojones to do the right thing.

———————————————————-

Update: Spyblog comments on mobile phones and the Identity Cards Act (2006) with reference to this issue.

This has all the appearance of a sneaky attempt to link Names and Addresses to unregistered pre-paid mobile phone handsets, something which would fit in with the rest of the Home Office’s Communications Traffic Data retention and snooping plans.

It also looks suspiciously like the sort of data which the Home Office would like to sell to private sector companies, like the controversial, data hungry 118800 mobile phone directory service. (see The Register – Mobile directory made legal threats to get personal details)

So if O2 won’t, then hmg will, eh?