Szlwzl Blog

Dublin Marathon pictures are now available – thought I'd screengrab the one which shows we actually completed it(in case this was in doubt!!)

I use Google’s myTracks a lot and found it really useful today while running the Dublin Marathon to keep track of times and distances. It seems to be slightly inaccurate today as it is saying that we actually did 26.9 miles but gives a good idea of what we did. You can click through to see the larger map and even times(the geek in me fricking loves this). 

We raised a great amount of cash for the MS Society – totals are on here and here – thanks to all of our sponsors!!

View Dublin Marathon in a larger map

I made a quick comment to the BBC about this story highlighting the fact that it appeared to be just a press release and got a great reply back from the business editor. The link shows how the story was changed very quickly after publication.
On another note, newssniffer.co.uk looks like a very useful site.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: NewsOnline Comments <[email protected]>
Date: 7 October 2010 17:20
Subject: FW: Feedback [NewsWatch]
To: <removed>

Dear Mr Whittaker

Many thanks for your e-mail.

I can only concur – when I spotted the story on Wednesday morning on the
website, I had it changed immediately.

The story now focuses on the company's results.

I believe it is ok to mention that Gregg's is now selling croissants and
similar fare, not least as this is not the kind of food that one would
associate with this store chain.

But the original headline and lead of the story was clearly not in
order.

I have had words with both the author and the sub editor who published
the story.

Regards

Tim Weber
Business editor
BBC News – interactive + radio   http://bbc.co.uk/business
<direct phone etc removed>

—–Original Message—–
From: <removed
Sent: 06 October 2010 09:45
To: NewsOnline Comments
Subject: Feedback [NewsWatch]

From:           Simon whittaker
Email address:  <removed>
Country:        UK

COMMENTS: This is not a news story, it is a regurgitated press release.
Absolutely ridiculous…
Simon whittaker, UK

URL:    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11482293

From: “FOI Enquiries” <[email protected]>
Date: 6 September 2010 16:10:31 GMT+01:00
Subject: FOIA – Internal Review – IR2010026

Please find attached the response to your internal review request considered under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act. 

Information Policy and Compliance Team 

BBC Freedom of Information
Room 2252
BBC White City
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TS, UK

Website: www.bbc.co.uk/foi/
Email: mailto:[email protected]
Tel: 020 8008 2883
Fax: 020 8008 2398

http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

IR2010026 – dislcoure emails.pdf
Download this file

Internal Review Decision Note – 2010-09-02.pdf
Download this file

IR2010026 – disclosure – RFI20100948 – final response.pdf
Download this file

RFI20200835 – final response.pdf
Download this file

I was intrigued to see that the beebplayer application had been removed from the android marketplace and submitted an FOI request to discover more. The response back from them was not especially helpful and I have responded asking for further information. I find it very annoying that the beebplayer app was removed – it is the one I use the most on my HTC hero. I will probably not be able to upgrade my phone to 2.2  and therefore will not be able to use the services I have paid for in the license fee 🙁 There is an interesting thread here about the removal of the beebplayer from the marketplace.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: FOI Enquiries <[email protected]>
Date: 13 July 2010 17:33
Subject: RFI20100835 – request for information
To:

Dear Mr Whittaker,

Please find attached the response to your request for information, reference RFI20100835.

<<RFI20200835 – final response.pdf>>

Kind regards

Louise Wright
Information Policy and Compliance    

BBC Freedom of Information
Room 2252, White City
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TS, UK

Website: www.bbc.co.uk/foi
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 020 8008 2883
Fax: 020 8008 2398

 
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

On October 25th the wife I will be running the Dublin marathon and are going to try and raise a bunch of money for the MS Society. We’d really appreciate your assistance with raising as much money as possible and have set ourselves a target of trying to raise £1000 each. If anyone would like to join us on the run that would be brilliant but if not then if you could spare a few gbp/ausd/usd or any other currency you have then the link is http://bit.ly/simonrunsdublin. THANK YOU!!!!

Have edited my FOI request to BIS re #debill to try and get the
information I am interested in.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Simon Whittaker
Date: 17 June 2010 21:31
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information Request 10/0699 – Internal Review
To: “REMOVED”

HI David,

Many thanks for your respose, what I am interested in discovering is
the process by which the Digital economy Bill was modified to include
items such as net disconnection and the incredible powers which Lord
Mandleson wanted to be granted to Secretary of State and which were
quite sensibly refused by the due process, I am also interested to
discover if it was planned to always implement this as a washup bill.
Therefore, I would like to rephrase my request as:

Please can you provide all communication(such as memoranda, email &
minutes of meetings) relating to the proposed digital economy bill
from August 2009, September 2009, October 2009, & November 2009 which
included Sion Simon, Lord Mandleson or Stephen Timms as participants
or recipients.

Many thanks

Simon

On 16 June 2010 09:59, REMOVED wrote:
> Simon
>
> I am unclear whether I replied to this.  I believe I started to do so, but can’t see an email in my sent box, so may not have finished it.
>
> Laura Williams has moved on to a new job now and so she wouldn’t be handling any further FOI requests about the Digital Economy Act.  If you send any adjusted request to me then I will pass it on to an action official.
>
> To be frank though, I really doubt that there is any information of the sort you are seeking to find at BIS or DCMS – for example we don’t hold any information at all about what Lord Mandelson may or may not have done other than as Ministerial business, for instance in his private capacity.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> REMOVED
>

Received this from BIS – further investigation required.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: REMOVED
Date: 9 June 2010 19:05
Subject: Freedom of Information Request 10/0699 – Internal Review
To:

Dear Mr Whittaker,

I am writing to you in response to your request for an internal review
in relation to FOI request 10/0699. Your original FOI request, made on
23 April 2010, asked for:

“Minutes of meetings which took place in August 2009 between Lord
Mandelson and David Geffen. I would also like to see all emails
relating to the proposed digital economy bill from August 2009,
September 2009 & October 2009 which were sent between Sion Simon, Lord
Mandleson & Stephen Timms.”

Following searches of relevant electronic and paper records, I confirm
what was said in Laura Williams’s email of 17th May to you, that we
have found that the information you requested on both parts of your
request is not held by this department, because there is no record of
such a meeting taking place as Ministerial business. Nor has any
information been withheld or subject to exemptions.

By way of explanation:
“Holding” information means information held relating to the business
of the Department that:
• we have created, or
• we have received from another body or person, or
• held by another body on our behalf

As the Digital Economy Bill was run as a joint Bill between the
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Department for
Culture, Media and Sport, searches also included any relevant
information held or created on our behalf by the Department for
Culture, Media and Sport.

BIS use an email system that auto-deletes email after 12 months.
However, staff are asked to individually select and store emails which
document evidence of government activity and decisions in the
department’s electronic records and document management system, where
they are treated as a record, and usually deleted at about 7 years.

There is no specific policy relating to taking note or minutes of
meetings.  However, I refer you to Guidance on the Management of
Private Office Papers, published jointly by the Cabinet Office and The
National Archives which can be found on the National Archives’ website
at http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/popapersguidance2009.pdf.
In particular paragraphs 4 and 13 (ii) are relevant.

But having reasonably searched our records, we found first that there
is no record of such a meeting you referred to as having taken place
as Ministerial business. Therefore no minutes would be held by the
Department(s) and I confirm that there are none. Second, we found that
no such emails were sent using BIS’s Departmental email systems
between the Ministers and within the constraints listed in your
request.

Lastly we would not be able to refer you to another Department(s) as
we are unaware of any records they keep regarding the subject of your
request apart from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, which
we have been in contact with as mentioned above.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you
have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

          Information Commissioner’s Office
          Wycliffe House
          Water Lane
          Wilmslow
          Cheshire
          SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

REMOVED

REMOVED | Director Information Economy | Business Group | Department
for Business, Innovation & Skills | [email protected] | | |
www.bis.gov.uk

The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) is building a
dynamic and competitive UK economy by creating the conditions for
business success; promoting innovation, enterprise and science; and
giving everyone the skills and opportunities to succeed. To achieve
this we will foster world-class universities and promote an open
global economy.

BIS – Investing in our future

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government
Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless
Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number
2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored
and/or recorded for legal purposes.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From:
Date: 28 May 2010 14:37
Subject: OFCOM NEWS RELEASE: Draft code of practice to reduce online copyright infringement
To: 

 

 

For Immediate Release

28 May 2010

 

Draft code of practice to reduce online copyright infringement

A proposed code of practice which implements legislative measures aimed at reducing online copyright infringement has today been published by Ofcom, as part of its new duties under the Digital Economy Act 2010 (the Act).

 

The Act requires that the code of practice is implemented no later than eight months from Royal Assent, including approval from the European Commission. Subject to consultation and approval, Ofcom expects the code to come into force in early 2011.

 

The code of practice

The draft code sets out how and when Internet Service Providers (ISPs) covered by the code will send notifications to their subscribers to inform them of allegations that their accounts have been used for copyright infringement. 

 

In passing the Act, Parliament’s intention was that Ofcom should apply the obligations in a proportionate way, with the code initially covering only the larger fixed-line ISPs, but with the clear message that, should levels of copyright infringement on other networks, including mobile, increase then those ISPs will similarly be required to comply with the obligations.  Ofcom proposes, therefore, that fixed-line ISPs with over 400,000 subscribers will be covered initially.  This would mean that the seven largest ISPs – BT, Talk Talk, Virgin Media, Sky, Orange, O2 and Post Office – will be covered by the code from the outset.  Ofcom proposes to regularly review evidence of online copyright infringement across all service providers and to extend the scope of the code if appropriate. 

 

The code also sets out the threshold for including subscribers on a copyright infringers list which must be compiled by ISPs.  ISPs will have to record the number of notifications sent to their subscribers and maintain an anonymised list of alleged serial copyright infringers.  Copyright holders can then request information on this list and pursue a court order to identify serial infringers and take legal action against them.  Ofcom is proposing a three stage notification process for ISPs to inform subscribers of copyright infringements and proposes that subscribers which have received three notifications within a year may be included in a list requested by a copyright owner.

 

Appeals process

Ofcom’s approach is guided by the need to protect the interests of consumers and citizens.  Ofcom will establish an independent, robust subscriber appeals mechanism for consumers who believe they have received incorrect notifications, arrangements for enforcement and dealing with industry disputes, as well as sharing the costs arising from the code.

 

Additional measures to reduce copyright infringement

The code of practice forms part of a wider set of industry activity to tackle online copyright infringement including consumer education, the promotion of lawful alternative services and targeted legal action against serious infringers.  Ofcom intends to monitor how these develop and will report regularly to Government on both the effectiveness of the code and on the additional measures.

 

The consultation can be found here http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/copyright-infringement/ and closes on 30 July 2010.

 

ENDS

NOTES FOR EDITORS

 

1.       Under section 124D of the Communications Act 2003 (as inserted by the Digital Economy Act 2010), Ofcom has a duty to make a code for the purpose of regulating the initial obligations of ISPs to send notifications and provide copyright infringement lists to copyright owners on request.

 

2.       The Act provides that the Secretary of State may by order impose technical measures which include bandwidth throttling and temporary account suspension 12 months after the Code comes into force.  Any such order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament.

 

3.       Ofcom is the independent regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries, with responsibilities across television, radio, telecommunications and wireless communications services.

 

4.       For further information about Ofcom please visit: www.ofcom.org.uk.  Ofcom’s news releases can be found at: www.ofcom.org.uk/media/.

 

CONTACT

 

Amber Vassiliou

Media & Corporate Relations

Ofcom

[email protected]

0300 123 4000

 

 

 

 

******************************************************************************************************************
For more information visit www.ofcom.org.uk

This email (and any attachments) is confidential and intended for the use of the addressee only.

If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message and delete it from your system.

This email has been scanned for viruses. However, you open any attachments at your own risk.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and do not represent the views or opinions of Ofcom unless expressly stated otherwise.
******************************************************************************************************************

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________

Consultation is listed below – would urge all to take part

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Updates
Date: 28 May 2010 14:01
Subject: Ofcom Update: Draft code of practice to reduce online
copyright infringement
To:

A proposed code of practice which implements legislative measures
aimed at reducing online copyright infringement has today been
published by Ofcom, as part of its new duties under the Digital
Economy Act 2010.

Subject to consultation and approval, Ofcom expects the code to come
into force in early 2011.

The consultation can be found here:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/copyright-infringement/

…………………………………………………………………

Please do not respond to this email. To remove yourself from this
update list, use the online forms:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/subscribe/select_list.htm

******************************************************************************************************************
For more information visit www.ofcom.org.uk

This email (and any attachments) is confidential and intended for the
use of the addressee only.

If you have received this email in error please notify the originator
of the message and delete it from your system.

This email has been scanned for viruses. However, you open any
attachments at your own risk.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender
and do not represent the views or opinions of Ofcom unless expressly
stated otherwise.
******************************************************************************************************************