herbal remedies pcos buy cialis best care health

Ramsay Melhuish

Rama on stage with OOOD @ Nozstock Festival 2011Ramsay got switched on to the wonderful world of bleeps, beats and aural treats through listening to John Peel on Radio 1 in the 1980s. He was soon flirting with the dark and dirty world of early English thrash and hypnotic noise, with a brief stint as guitarist in a grunge band.  An avid collector of music from his early days, his dance music collection started in the late 80s, and his initial reluctance to embrace the CD revolution led to the amassing of a sizeable collection of vinyl, much of it now quite rare.

Finding himself in London via Haad Rin full-moon parties in Thailand at the beginning of the 90s, and fuelled by the vibrant traveller and squat party scenes he found in the city, he started buying any form of hard trance music he could get his hands on.  In 1992 he met Steve and discovered a shared love of playing music all night... and after buying some Technics 1210s that same year, he discovered a shared love of making folks stomp and wiggle all night at house and squat parties.  This culminated in helping Steve organise the first Datura party in Oxford in 1994, one of the very first UK psy-trance parties outside London and only the first of the many events in which he had a hand. It was at this seminal party that Rama played one of his first public DJ sets alongside future luminaries of early UK psytrance Mark Allen, Chrisbo, Lol and Yazz (and Steve, of course). Rama went on to be main organiser for two subsequent Datura parties at The Rocket venue in London.  When OOOD formed in October 1994 he became (and remains) a frequent visitor to the Stooodio.  Various forays to Eastern climes and numerous spectacular party locations over the subsequent years - armed with DAT players, mini-mixers and eventually CDs - meant for an immersion in the world of psychedelic music of all kinds. Rama DJing at Tribe of Frog NYE 2011-12

Rama co-wrote his first track with OOOD members in 1999 and performed with the band for the first time in 2001. His energy on stage belies the fact that he is in command of the playback aspect of the live set; with his love of quirky samples and deft touch with Kaoscillator and Monotron, this has freed the other band members to do what they do best.  The planning and smooth flowing of OOOD’s live sets is due in no small part to his skill with Ableton Live.

Rama is currently part of the team organising Bristol’s semi-regular Jellyfish events, and plays out regularly in both town and field.  An eclectic and versatile DJ, he is not a big believer in musical boundaries, and you can find a wide selection of his mixes online on his Soundcloud page, and on this site.


design by Design by Suloo

©2012-2014 by OOOD || All Rights Reserved

NOTE! This site uses cookies and similar technologies.

By continuing to use this website you express your consent to its use of cookies! Learn more

I understand

The EU cookie law (e-Privacy Directive)

The law which applies to how you use cookies and similar technologies for storing information on a user’s equipment such as their computer or mobile device changed on 26 May 2011.

We’ve answered some of your FAQs in a YouTube video, summarising how you can comply and the approach the ICO is taking to enforcement. (Playing YouTube videos sets a cookie.)


ICO guidance

Updated in May 2012, our cookies guidance sets out the changes to the cookies law and explains the steps you need to take to ensure you comply.

Download the ICO cookies guidance (pdf)

Our guidance includes additional information about implied consent:

  • Implied consent is a valid form of consent and can be used in the context of compliance with the revised rules on cookies.
  • If you are relying on implied consent you need to be satisfied that your users understand that their actions will result in cookies being set. Without this understanding you do not have their informed consent.
  • You should not rely on the fact that users might have read a privacy policy that is perhaps hard to find or difficult to understand.
  • In some circumstances, for example where you are collecting sensitive personal data such as health information, you might feel that explicit consent is more appropriate.

Find out more about the action we're taking on cookies

European data protection authorities opinion

In June 2012, European data protection authorities (as part of the Article 29 Working Party) adopted an opinion which clarifies that some cookie uses might be exempt from the requirement to gain consent:

  • Some cookies can be exempted from informed consent under certain conditions if they are not used for additional purposes. These cookies include cookies used to keep track of a user’s input when filling online forms or as a shopping cart, also known as session-id cookies, multimedia player session cookies and user interface customisation cookies, eg language preference cookies to remember the language selected by the user.
  • First party analytics cookies are not likely to create a privacy risk if websites provide clear information about the cookies to users and privacy safeguards, eg a user friendly mechanism to opt out from any data collection and where they ensure that identifiable information is anonymised.

Cookies and personal data

Regulation 6 covers the use of electronic communications networks to store information, eg using cookies, or gain access to information stored in the terminal equipment of a subscriber or user.

Although devices which process personal data give rise to greater privacy and security implications than those which process data from which the individual cannot be identified, the Regulations apply to all uses of such devices, not just those involving the processing of personal data.

Where the use of a cookie type device does involve the processing of personal data, service providers will need to make sure they comply with the additional requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998 (the Act). This includes the requirements of the third data protection principle which states that data controllers must not process personal data that is excessive. Where personal data is collected, the data controller should consider the extent to which that data can be effectively processed anonymously. This is likely to be particularly relevant where the data is to be processed for a purpose other than the provision of the service directly requested by the user, for example, counting visitors to a website.

Confidentiality of communications and spyware

It should be remembered that the intention behind this Regulation is also to reflect concerns about the use of covert surveillance mechanisms online. Here, we are not referring to the collection of data in the context of conducting legitimate business online but the fact that so-called spyware can enter a terminal without the knowledge of the subscriber or user to gain access to information, store information or trace the activities of the user and that such activities often have a criminal purpose behind them.

Information to be provided

Cookies or similar devices must not be used unless the subscriber or user of the relevant terminal equipment:

(a) is provided with clear and comprehensive information about the purposes of the storage of, or access to, that information; and

(b) has given his or her consent.

The Regulations are not prescriptive about the sort of information that should be provided, but the text should be sufficiently full and intelligible to allow individuals to clearly understand the potential consequences of allowing storage and access to the information collected by the device should they wish to do so. This is comparable with the transparency requirements of the first data protection principle.

The Regulations state that once a person has used such a device to store or access data in the terminal equipment of a user or subscriber, that person will not be required to provide the information described and obtain consent (and discussed above) on subsequent occasions, as long as they met these requirements initially. Although the Regulations do not require the relevant information to be provided on each occasion, they do not prevent this.

Responsibility for providing the information and obtaining consent

The Regulations do not define who should be responsible for providing the information and obtaining consent. Where a person operates an online service and any use of a cookie type device will be for their purposes only, it is clear that that person will be responsible for complying with this Regulation.

Exemptions from the right to refuse a cookie

The Regulations specify that service providers should not have to provide the information and obtain consent where that device is to be used:

  • for the sole purpose of carrying out or facilitating the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network; or
  • where such storage or access is strictly necessary to provide an information society service requested by the subscriber or user.

In defining an 'information society service' the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 refer to 'any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by means of electronic equipment for the processing (including digital compression) and storage of data, and at the individual request of a recipient of a service'.

The term 'strictly necessary' means that such storage of or access to information should be essential, rather than reasonably necessary, for this exemption to apply. However, it will also be restricted to what is essential to provide the service requested by the user, rather than what might be essential for any other uses the service provider might wish to make of that data. It will also include what is required to comply with any other legislation the service provider might be subject to, for example, the security requirements of the seventh data protection principle.

Where the use of a cookie type device is deemed 'important' rather than 'strictly necessary', those collecting the information are still obliged to provide information about the device to the potential service recipient and obtain consent.

Wishes of subscribers and users

Regulation 6 states that consent for the cookie type device should be obtained from the subscriber or user but it does not specify whose wishes should take precedence if they are different.

There may well be cases where a subscriber, for example, an employer, provides an employee with a terminal at work along with access to certain services to carry out a particular task, where to effectively complete the task depends on using a cookie type device. In these cases, it would not seem unreasonable for the employer’s wishes to take precedence.

However, it also seems likely that there will be circumstances where a user’s wish should take precedence. To continue the above example, an employer’s wish to accept such a device should not take precedence where this will involve the unwarranted collection of personal data of that employee.