Ok, one last go RR (as you really aren't going to read those links are you ?... but it is highly recommended)

There are two reasonably distinct issues here, what our personal data consists of and what Personal Data means according to the GDPR

Examples are tricky but on another Blog I frequent someone else also asked about Phone Books as in " Surely 'that would contravene GDPR then ?"
Well yes it would if folks popped by to use your phone occasionally (eg at 2am) and you had not been warned about this sufficiently and signed up for it (without it being explained properly or by default) but it was all in the lengthy small print at the back of the book. Ah yes, but then 'it says you can use their phone like that too'; That's fine, Your Choice:

Yes, many -once inconvenienced like this- would go ex-directory..... Their Choice... and so on...

The parallel here with BT FON is that many seem to have been Opted In by stealth, eg. via subtle on-line changes on their website...
IMHO Ts&Cs need to be in writing (and about now many I have alerted to this are requesting them...)

Yes; folks should read the Ts&Cs: GDPR aims to end this kind of thing as I explained in several posts now (or at least tried to);
Explicit Consent is required...

In summary I -and many others- had their Privacy (and possibly Safety) impinged upon by BT 'assuming' it was OK to show our Locations on their Map; Again for my poorly neighbour the harm/suffering caused was most probably also 'material' under GDPR Rules.

Have a good (quiet) weekend everyone, but do be careful just what you sign up for !

You live out in the sticks, strangers turned up to use your hotspot and this negatively affected your ill neighbour...
Not that it'd necessarily be relevant but I'd be curious to know more detail, e.g. did groups of pot smoking youths turn up in in cars etc? Genuine question, I'm not trying to make light of your or the ill neighbour's experiences.

davew wrote:

Ok, one last go RR (as you really aren't going to read those links are you ?... but it is highly recommended)

No, I'm not overly inclined to do so.

I've been told by the most qualified person I personally know that BT aren't contravening GDPR and I have no reason at all to doubt her.

To be honest, I can't think of anything short of a successful court case declaring your position to be correct and forcing BT to change their arrangement that would make me believe she is wrong.

I also don't care enough. It's not affecting me or bothering me and I get the feeling that you're of the same mindset as me: nothing will make you change your mind.

So, it's pointless me reading them. I've put in my 2p worth and I'll leave the thread again.

Guys, Guys. Guys.... I never thought I would say this but I am beginning to understand just why TOAD simply repeats "Read RAVE"....
because folks don't (and he did not write RAVE either) !

Lpgc: See #68 (!!) onwards......

Sorry RR I have read the relevant parts GDPR, and posted up lots to substantiate my 'case' too.....
not just MY opinions and yet received manly criticism for it; Plus I don't care that much either:
Thank goodness other Fora etc have 'got it' - and without various insults ( not from you) !

A-ha ! I have just received this from someone who actually 'gets it' (and they sent it to me without any unnecessary insults attached, too...) !

https://www.livingmap.com/technology/location-matters-geospatial-information-under-gdpr/

Really can't argue with their conclusions....

"Conclusion: Understanding location matters

If there is one thing to take away from the examples above, it’s that personal location data is extremely valuable. GDPR will increase the pressure on organisations that process data (that’s most of them), improve security standards and create transparent communication about how and why data is used.

Greater understanding and transparency about different types of data and the consequences of its use is something both companies and users will benefit from in the long term. "

• and that final paragraph explains much of the conflict within this Topic: COMPANIES want to keep using OUR Locational Data;
  If it becomes increasingly detrimental to us then their use of such Locational Data will be increasingly limited too:
  QED

(Morat: HINT:
Please don't send them patronisng notes stating how "this shows how 'Understanding location doesn't matter' " or some such nonsense !?

Interesting to see what happens as/when you Zoom In:-

https://www.strava.com/heatmap#12.00/-121.67282/38.17023/hot/all

To me it seems 'livingmap' refers only to the potential for mobile phones and apps to identify the user... i.e. identify a person.

Not sure why you linked to the Strava site, what happens when we zoom in? For sure if a device location was tracked the movement pattern could be used to identify a person (with further effort) but houses with hotspots don't move.

Others here have said that the legislation (GDPR) applies only to the identification of people and so far I don't think you've shown anything that proves this wrong, in fact everything you've said points to the identification of people being the problem (as opposed to pointing to an address being a problem)? However it has occurred to me that it would be possible to identify owners of locations with hotspots (not accurately where many properties are close together but with increasing accuracy when properties are further apart...) by cross referencing hotspot location with land registry records.. at a price (£3 for a name from the UK.gov site). Dunno if that would be illegal in some circumstances but if I were a lazy private investigator who wanted to know who owned a property with a hotspot in a very rural location that's probably how I'd start. To any firm etc wanting to do this en-mass for marketing purposes the costs would probably be prohibitive and the land registry might start to ask questions.

If we put all the above together we're left with... It could be possible to identify the owner of a property who has a hotspot, but no more possible than it would be to identify the owner of any none hotspot property. What can we say is unique to the owner of a property with a hotspot.... considering a high proportion of properties have broadband and the limited difference between having broadband and having broadband that features a hotspot. After all, you didn't previously realise the difference between broadband and broadband with a hotspot so why would others be seeked out because they have a hotspot? The last sentence could take argument in any direction eh!

I looked at post #68... Perhaps if the man in the van was using 4g for internet access he wouldn't have been blocking your drive... but maybe he would. If this went to court there could be an ironic situation in which you claim he was using your FON, he says he was on 4g, you need BT to prove (from their records, if possible) that he was using your FON... Would you (and BT) need to be in breach of GDPR to prove that van man was using your FON? lol.

Laughing aside, if a daft lad or man in a van attacked you with a blade he used for cutting bacca and cleaning out his pipe, so you pulled out a 12 bore and fired at him you could take 90 people's eyes out using the shotgun when you could probably have run away. Millions of BT hotspot users seem to like the service, you could get around all your problems by using a different ISP but you chose to go with the shotgun scenario and blame van man's presence on a service you chose to sign up to.. though you claim not to have realised all the implications of signing up to that service even though you are capable of understanding all this about GDPR. Isn't the real case that you were offended by the van man parking outside your drive on a public road on which you are un-accustomed to strangers parking but have chosen to blame this on BT?

Sorry Lpgc thanks for your considered input but it's only going to be a quick reply but Locational Data is essentially classed as an "Identifier" within the GDPR as in: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/

... and yes, that's the point, it _could _be used with other types of personal data to build a 'profile' of folks (ie. like the SN so-and-sos have been doing for years......)

'Strava' were included as an example within that 'livingmap' article as to how/why detailed locational data could present (US) problems....
As you Zoom In(the resolution is too course for you to get much 'intrusive' information (unless you Log In and identify yourself);
FON is similar, BT's maps are IMHO far too detailed....

The man in the van was definitely using an SMS App. as there was a 'witness': (Nosy neighbour's son with binoculars; Seriously !!)

I may ask for my poorly neighbour's permission to post up his original FON Location (suitably disguised) so you can better see what
the hell I am talking (and most angry) about !

I would guess the sms app would be Whatsapp most likely, either that, or he may have been using an app like the three intouch or the other ones that existed before wifi calling became more standard. doesn't really matter what he was using at any rate.

All I can see on the map BT provide is a vague heat map - which only shows lots/quite a few/not so many. Not a specific location even, its a vague area of the street or even just the whole street in the case of a small road). Is there some map your using other than the one at http://www.btwifi.com/find/ ? I don't have BT anymore as I felt it was far too expensive for the service provided (I don't want BT sport channels, nor do i want to pay for them, let alone line rental for a phone that I didn't really use, I now have my mobile and broadband bill coming to less than the BT broadband bill with the line rental alone was, yes I lost access to the FON service, but frankly it wasn't something I felt worked well enough to warrant paying for at the time anyway).

I still don't understand why if you don't like the way they operate that you continue to fund their services - you can continue to inform people if thats what you desire to do, but hitting them in the pocket (and encourging other people offended by the info your giving to do the same) is more likely to influence them than ranting at them in the current fashion but continuing to pay them.

I'm only approaching this from kind of a thought experiment kind of view Dave, as much interested in if law agrees with common sense as any other aspect, not on one side or the other.

Looked at your link but it's only 'definitions', might expect the devil to be in details outside of definitions but would agree that in definitions alone it seems a person can be identified not only by name but also by other specifics such as address (? question to all).

Then I looked briefly beyond definitions... In 'principles relating to processing of personal data' 5.1 I don't see anything hotpsots do to contravene legislation... What points do you reckon contravene it?

Kind of broke my own rules by reading into stuff like that and haven't read much further... I reckon if something flies in the face of common sense it's open to being challenged anyway and most people would agree with common sense... so I generally wouldn't bother reading stuff like that when there might something in later points x and y that are exceptions to points a b c. Can't be an expert in law without lots of study but can be very good at common sense which usually prevails and even if it fails everyone with common sense is on side.

You might be going against common sense on this one... An ISP that potentially shares some of your bandwidth with it's other customers, on the flip side so you can share some of their other customers bandwidth when you're away from home, seems a good idea. You don't know who's FON you're using, just that you're using a FON and you know where the FONs are. There's little to read into the ISP saying use of hotspots for their customers is free, the facility is at no added cost in the terms of the contract and if you opted out of that part of the contract (so maybe wouldn't allow others to use a hotspot at your location) there's nothing to say you should pay a lower price. Why should this be illegal? If you don't like the arrangement don't go with the ISP that provides this service...

<<<<< is sitting on the sidelines, drinking my tea, smoking a ciggy, thinking why are people getting so het up on GDPR, it doesn’t matter what you do, some bastard always gets hold of your details, delete all the crap emails, throw the junk mail in the bin, block any A-holes that call you.
Reading and agreeing to t&c means nothing, the companies will do as they feel fit..
This post was Gordon informing us about GDPR which seems to have started a massive debate, let’s all go play with our cars and have fun..

Ok then Lpgc/Brian/Chris, all fair points and I will try to answer the questions and summarise (and to an extent repeat) the situation in one post if that’s OK chaps:

General: The new GDPR and other related ‘rules/guidelines' (eg. PECR and ASA) which are aimed at stopping the Big Boys from treating us Peasants all like ‘commodities’ ( and/or numpties) have, one way or another, been infringed by BT.

Patently if we can all be inconvenienced by a Van man etc (and not know why) then something is ‘wrong’…
..
Specific: Folks on here are tech-savvy and so might say ‘so what’ ? Less tech-savvy BT BB neighbours are rather more incensed: As mentioned I am pursuing this with BT/ICO (and mainly for the neighbours now); From my ‘awareness’ campaign alone I suspect of the millions of ‘Free’ BT HotSpots maybe 2/3rds of them don’t know it means them ! What will happen next ? Perhaps specific OPT IN will be required or advised. Maybe 00000s have been unwittingly inconvenienced, maybe it is one of your own poorly neighbours ?

FON: Again, it may great to have a ‘shared service’ like this, but only as long as we know the Full Facts too, ie. BT can’t just hide it away in their Ts&Cs and say “So what ? “ !

What I have found out is that many using BT BB simply don’t like this (and without prompting from me come to some rather interesting conclusions eg. “Is that why BT have been trying to get me to upgrade and to a higher-power hub ?”

Personal: I really don’t like what some have posted up here (not you three !); When I start to be falsely accused of Online Threats and other nonsense then ‘something has gone wrong' there too I’m a Big Boy myself, expect better. but will/can ‘dish it back’ too: I really don’t care what “Fleecem&Leggit” have advised (Morat) either … but it’s still hilarious ! ..Similarly it is ‘disingenuous’ when I post up a link, not even my words and get unpleasant (and misinformed) abuse, surely that’s what rrs.net is for !?

Overall I suppose it is my fault for mentioning it; God forbid it might actually help someone !

Brian: Did not actually find out what SMS app. he was using, just that he had been there 30-40 times late at night, engine running using it (although my neighbours suspected he ‘was watching porn’ !)

Lpgc: A lot of this stuff is counter-intuative, yes: Seems like we have trusted the Big Boys too much though, and expect the likes of BT to ‘somehow be doing the right thing/s’ !?
Incidentally I did not see you last paragraph when I replied last night: ‘Knives and shooters?? Maybe you were watching The Sweeney: “ Look out Guv’nor hes’s got a WifFi !! ” ?

Chris; Yes, GDPR, is a massive topic and will continue to be so (but not on here ?)
A bit late - and also debateable - but if LR had been made to meet certain Directives/Regulations (eg. concerning EMC and Product Liabilites) early enough then we would all likely have had 3rd-Gen Receivers fitted (and for free) !!

This is a bit late (too) but FWIW here is a fairly brief description of the aims/intentions of the GDPR (and why it has 'put the wind up' numerous companies.....)::

https://www.welivesecurity.com/2017/03/24/gdpr-an-explainer/

...... Do feel free to spread it far and wide !!

-I also now have a (suitably-doctored) BT Map of my neighbours hotspot to post up on here (but won't myself as I would have to open an account with another nosy US-based Photo-Hosting site: If someone has posted photos on here please PM me your e-mail address and I will send it (unless this impinges on the GDPR. obviously !)

No Takers (yet); No problem !

Suffice it to say that when you go to the Street View (and with the little yellow chap)
on the BT WiFi HotSpot Map it shows his house number too.........................

<<< admits this is all over my head, haven’t looked into how people can be affected by it, I just do as I mentioned, I don’t think we will ever be free from our lives having intrusions that we don’t want.
Jeez, even my cars been intruded on by some one with a wireless item, battery dead after 2 days non use. ( new battery )
Asked all the neighbours if any new toys for Christmas..they all say no 🙁

and that proves what? That you can work out the address of the hotspot but that doesn't give you any information on the person that lives there. If you read the thread you linked to in post #125, in the conclusion it specifically says that PERSONAL LOCATION data is extremely valuable, not simply location in isolation. As has been pointed out numerous times, a location alone is not Personal Data. The strava heatmap came into the news because you could zoom in on places in Afghanistan and see the route people took when going for a run which made it very easy to pinpoint where US Military bases were located. Nothing to do with Personal Data and as it only affected US service personnel where GDPR doesn't apply (as it is EU legislation) it is irrelevant. Or at least it is to anyone except a member of the Taliban with an RPG who could find it rather useful.

Well for a start it proves you (probably) didn't read the other related links ?

eg, https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/personal-data/

https://www.welivesecurity.com/2017/03/24/gdpr-an-explainer/

No need for any more facetious remarks: See the bigger GDPR picture !

The link in #125 was clearly an explanation as to why DETAILED LOCATIONAL data was ill advised

The main point is that such data combined with that on other databases then allows a PERSONAL PROFILE to be MADE

READ GDPR !

no10chris wrote:

<<< admits this is all over my head, haven’t looked into how people can be affected by it, I just do as I mentioned, I don’t think we will ever be free from our lives having intrusions that we don’t want.
Jeez, even my cars been intruded on by some one with a wireless item, battery dead after 2 days non use. ( new battery )
Asked all the neighbours if any new toys for Christmas..they all say no 🙁

Think Richard had a problem with a wireless thermostat when he moved, so might not be the kind of toy they would even think about?

davew wrote:

The main point is that such data combined with that on other databases then allows a PERSONAL PROFILE to be MADE

Reckon I was the first to point out that hotspot location could be combined with land registry enquiries to find the name of the owner of a property with a hotspot?
If there's only a problem when data from multiple databases is combined, aren't the other databases (in multiple) equally guilty.. which even in your view could make government equally as guilty as BT because they offer access to the other database? Maybe even more so... Someone checking BT's hotspot map could easily argue they wanted to know where they could get net access / a milkman might think he really fancied the daughter at that house he used to deliver to but never did get her surname, worth the £3 to get her name by checking land registry records, no other reason to be searching land registry records but no questions asked. Every property owner is opted in on the land registry service without signing up to anything.

Although I appreciate the example Lpgc it seems any/all such examples are really rather 'unpopular' on here !!
(In fact in your example the security risk is reduced as there is a paper trail from your enquiry)

It is not up to us to make excuses for Companies/Governments/whoever either: Specifics on all this have been debated for some years (and here's another 30 pages folks won't read) https://www.clinicalstudydatarequest.com/Documents/Privacy-European-guidance.pdf

The points/conclusions remain essentially the same and are encompassed of course in: https://gdpr-info.eu/issues/personal-data/

However it seems it does not matter how many such links I post I still get abuse on here, and yet still without any 'counter-links' to
prove 'my' links wrong; It's truly bizarre ! (Just post up some independent proof guys; What do YOU think GDPR is for ??)

Anyway.... again BT have likely contravened several aspects of the GDPR / PECR / ASA etc: IF folks can park up and hassle folks with Hubs like this (and also potentially infringe their privacy and security) it is simply not acceptable; We can't just then say 'Big Buisness are b@st@rds' and leave it like that (and IMHO that is precisely why GDPR has come about in the first case.)

At the very least BT's HotSpot Hub 'Customers' should be treated better, and asked explicitly if they give consent to have their locations shown on BT's Map:...

• And not by default, stealth 'upgrade' Ts&Cs, "Well it's obvious" remarks, "Join 'Virgin' instead" etc etc; That is simply addressing a symptom not the cause.....

Perhaps Lpgc, like in your 'Sweeney' example it will take something really very serious to actually happen before more folks 'get it'
" Dispute over covert WiFi Location usage causes fatal stabbing in quiet residential street " ? Christ I do hope not ....