Dear The Authority for Television On Demand,

1) The names, positions and job descriptions (including roles/responsibilities) of past and current board members / senior management or any person involved with ATVOD who has influence on decisions made along with dates of service. As well as a summary of their previous work experience.

2) Total number of staff, broken down by total per job role with job description for each role. Names of individual lower level staff need not be reported.

3) All expenses relating to ATVOD staff on ATVOD business, but particularly for the names provided in q1. This should include where possible copies of receipts and should include any expense of £1 or more and comprise of but not be limited to hotel statements/bills, phone bills, general business and expenses, travel costs.

4) Disclosure of individuals met privately or publicly with any connection to any of the industries in which ATVOD or OFCOM are tasked with regulating. Times, dates and summaries of points up for discussion should be included along with the individual's name and organisation they represent.

5) Method's of investigation, the steps and techniques ATVOD use to investigate potential breaches. - Approximate length of an investigation.

6) For each year (2010, 2011, 2012):
a) How many total services came forward and notified by year end?
b) How many services had ATVOD chased for notification by year end?
c) How many complaints upheld by year end? Including names of services.
d) How many services were advised you they had close following notification or determination by year end? Provide reasons given.
e) How many services advised that they would change the way their service operates?
f) How many services had ATVOD referred to OFCOM by year end?
g) How many breaches were investigated by year end? Names of services.
h) Of those breaches how many were considered contraventions (repeat offences)?
i) How many notifications were considered 'out of scope'?
j) How many complaints from members of the public recieved by year end?
k) How many complaints from organsiations and/or charities such as mumsnet recieved by year end?
l) Total of financial penalties imposed?

7) Complaint case notes and evidence file with ATVOD's investigation documented for the top three breaches determined by the highest financial penalty imposed?

Yours faithfully,

Ben Yates

Dear ATVOD,

Thanks for your prompt response.

I appreciate you taking the time to answer the points raised despite not being bound by the formal FOI laws.

Your response has however prompted further questions to raise, please provide a response to the following.

"Please be aware that ATVOD is not covered by the Freedom of Information Act. However, we are committed to regulating in an open and transparent manner and to that end have published details about who we are and how we operate on our website (www.atvod.co.uk). "

Why is ATVOD not accountable under the FOI framework? Can FOI requests be made to OFCOM or any other party for information relating to ATVOD? Please outline the official line as to why ATVOD do not fall under the scope of FOI like many other public regulators.

"We do not publish a detailed breakdown of all meetings with industry stakeholders."

Why does ATVOD choose not to record meetings with all industry stakeholders? This concerns me deeply given the lucrative nature of the Media Industry, especially in regards to online video entertainment for which you are the designated regulator. The potential for bias and manipulation is huge and ATVOD cannot truly be a transparent regulator if the individuals and organisations that fall under your regulations when such records are not available.

Looking at ATVOD's board members it looks as though the Adult Industry is not represented at all across your board. To me, despite pledges from Peter Johnson and other ATVOD spokespeople at Adult Industry events of wanting to 'work with' the industry to protect children from adult content on the Internet.

Given the popularity of the Internet and On Demand services with adult content providers and given that all of your complaints, especially the ones that were upheld, focused on Adult Content providers. That industry should be as well represented as say terrestrial and pay-per-view channels.

Why is the online adult industry so under represented within ATVOD?

Does ATVOD actually care about working together for a 'safer' 'better' internet where children are that much safer?

Given that within the top 100 sites visited from the UK at Alexa.com, there are six adult sites. Five of which are tube sites that provide completely free adult content to anyone with not so much as a disclaimer page. One at 23 in the chart.

What do ATVOD foresee their role is in relation to tube sites that clearly out of their jurisdiction?

Yours sincerely,

Ben Yates

Dear ATVOD,

Thanks for the information.

I still disagree with you regarding the transparency of ATVOD's board and remit. It is true that Chris Ratcliffe maybe a prominent figure within the adult industry and a highly respected one at that but I'm afraid to say many of the producers who have received ATVOD determinations have been smaller producers, arguably in the industry more out of interest than profitability, not major producers like Portland TV.

Would it be possible to meet a compliance / investigations officer at ATVOD's Windsor base?

I think it's also pretty clear that even the Government cannot commit to regulating the internet, especially if the jurisdiction is elsewhere.

Yours sincerely,

Ben Yates