Slashdot Mirror
FTC Moves Forward With National Do-Not-Call List
netringer writes "The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is proposing some new regulations creating a national 'Do Not Call' list to keep US phones from being rung by telemarketers. Telemarketers who call a number on the list could be fined up $11,000. The new FTC rules also require that telemarketers have Caller ID enabled and limit abandoned 'hang up' calls from predictive dialers. The new rules have some loopholes, allowing calls from charities and businesses that have somehow gotten your permission or have done business with you before. The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities."
Perhaps the guy who just asked slashdot has his answer.
For a do not SPAM list. What a concept, out-in should be the defacto thing, never opt-out, it presupposed willingness to be harrassed.
Where's the FTC's national "Do Not Spam" list?
Loosely related, but you can currently get off Junk mail lists through a similar method.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
to set legal precedent for effective anti-spam regulations?
C|N>K
Telemarketers hang up on you!
The DMA suing would basically be an admission that they use unethical tactics.
From from what I've read, this doesn't say that they can't call, only that can't call if the number they are calling is on the Do Not Call list (and also the Caller ID stuff, which is secondary).
Frankly, I don't see how this would in any way affect 'buying oppurtunities', as the list would be opt-in, and so anyone on that list DOESN'T want to hear from telemarketers; it's actually better for the marketers since they have a greater chance of reaching someone who might be their product.
This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
Finally a list where you can post "ME TOO!!!" and it actually MATTERS!
I'd say at least 60% of all telemarketing calls I get are hangups and it is very annoying. My friend recently called from korea and left a message on my voicemail, his phone number didn't show up on the caller ID so no I have to answer all the unavailables. Sheesh, is it annoying. The worst is the pre-recorded unsolicited crap though, I had one of those come in right as I was about to call the doctor for an emeregency. Luckily it didn't turn out to be anything because the damn recording tied up my line so long I would have died before I got through.
can I be put on the DO-NOT-SPAM-ME list????
What do you mean it's only for telephones?
I'd like you to know Mr. Politician, I voted for the other guy.
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
doing the same for the Direct Marketing Association as we have for the self styled 'spam king'
Details here
Humorous signatures are over-rated.
The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities
Good grief! Can you the ultimate evil company's board of directors?
CEO, EvilCo: Satan himself
VP of Intellectual Property, West Coast: Jack Valenti
VP of Intellectual Property, East Coast: Hilary Rosen
VP of Sales and Marketing: The Direct Marketing Association
CFO: David Skilling
VP of Getting Royally Screwed Every Time Shit Goes Down: The customer.
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
Please. All the telemarketers want to sell you are 'insurance', aluminum siding, and all unwanted assorted crap. I'm an informed consumer and if there's something I want to get, I'll find it and get it myself, thank you.
-Cyc
/.'s 10 Millionth
The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities
Seems to me that if you took the time to sign up for this list, then you would be just plain pissed off by any further telemarketer calls, and thus not likely to purchase anything anyways. No customer lost here.
Now, if they really want to advertise, I've found those washroom/urinal advertising signs to be quite effective as most men prefer to look straight forward and having something to read helps prevent the possibility of peripheral vision eye-wandering.
I originally read that as "The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue U.S. consumers for the potential loss of buying opportunities." and was remarkably unshocked :)
But you'd have to check that they aren't in the "Do Not Call" list first.....
I'll call you if I want something your service offers. To quote one of my parents "We don't do business over the phone" (unless we made the call).
I seem to be pretty clear of them, but whenever I visit my parents place, even if it's just for dinner or something real short, they get a lot of silence-calls. Not hang-ups, the line doesn't go dead, just silence. My folks are pretty boring people and it's just them, so I'm not inclined to believe someone is fucking with them. Is this some type of auto-dialer fucking up somewhere?
I can't believe people would use something like an auto-dialer. Go to the big house; bread and water, icy-showers, guards whupping your ass round the clock, and the only way? Suicide.
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
...I guess I'll have to put up with tormenting the Jehovah's Witnesses instead.
Is
"The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities." the funniest sentence ever?
"But we wanted to offer them a once in a lifetime chance!!!!!"
So far, the New York version has been fairly effective at stopping telemarketers from calling. I'm shocked, though, that the W bunch would have kept this thing going forward. My guess: they'll tank the lawsuit from the DMA and then say "We tried.".
Amusing that this do-not-mail list is maintained by the very group that is going to sue to stop the new do-not-call list.
As with every other law, I'm sure the lobbyists will make sure that we'll still get our fair share of calls from "legitamized" companies.
From the FTC website (emphasis added):
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has amended the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) to give consumers a choice about whether they want to receive most telemarketing calls. Consumers soon will be able to put their phone numbers on a national "do not call" registry. It will be illegal for most telemarketers to call a number listed on the registry.
We'll see exactly how it holds up...
What say we all get together and DoS DMA's infrastructure while this is in consideration? After all, if we were to keep calling them incessantly (and emailing, and whatever else we can do), it would certainly be an elegant form of vengeance, particularly if it impeded their ability to fight the FTC on this one. Don't forget to get the law firm that is "of counsel" to them in this matter :)
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
On a related note:
I grabbed one of those Telezappers while I was waiting in line at Staples last week buying a UPC. Danged if the silly thing doesn't work.
It emits the three tones that the phone company plays when you dial an out of service phone number. Everyone hears it when I answer any call - but the cool part is listening to the auto-dialers automatically hangup when they "hear" it.
There ought to be some way to hack together a similar machine using an old voice modem and some sort Tone controller - kind of a hybrid box for getting long distance phone calls for free. (Anyone else remember those?)
In illa quae ultra sunt
The FTC can't reasonably regulate international companies, that's why.
The trouble with a "Do Not Spam" list is that there is no international barrier to entry for any of these spammers. If they want to set their servers in Thailand and spam away, it's really not costing them any more than it would to have the servers sitting at a US facility (in fact, it might be cheaper).
Compared to Spam, the cost of making an international phone call is significant. The vast majority of telemarketing companies are not using call centers internationally because the cost associated far outweighs the possible income generated by these cold calls. The FTC could try to regulate Spam, but the are just too many loopholes to be successful.
between "...the potential loss of buying opportunities." and an actual lost sale. It all really makes me wonder wtf is the legal system coming to in the US? Ideas anyone?
C|N>K
DON'T LOSE OUT!
= cmdrtaco@slashdot.org
The FTC is about to take away your ability to recieve great offers and buying opportunities through email.
Stop them before they stop you!
For a small donation of only $10, you can help fund the fight against unwanted government regulation in direct marketing.
Remember that only you can make a difference.
You have received this mail because you indicated that you wanted to receive promotional offers of this kind. If you no longer wish to receive mail like this, please click this link:
http://www.spamhaus.com/addressverifier.pl?adress
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
What a golde..rem, prefect advertising spot.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
Personally I think this is more important than the war on terrorism. I mean, nobody's tried to blow me up lately, but these calls happen every single day. So who isn't going to want to be on the national do not call list?
Predictive dialing should simply be recognized as harassment and prosecuted as such under current law. If you or I repeatedly call somebody and then hang up, don't you think the police and/or phone company are going to be interested? Oh yeah, I forgot, the phone company is making money on all those calls.
We could also legislate that all unsolicited commercial phone calls carry a surcharge. This surcharge can be rebated to consumers directly -- it shows up on your phone bill. The more you've been called, the more you get back.
The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities.
Next: Stalker sues State for issuing restraining order, denying his ex-wife the opportunity to be harassed mercilessly.
Moo
Why don't they do this with email and physical addresses so people wont mail you or email you, and maybe keeping away door to door salesmen too.
You mean that the "remove me" link in spams isn't sufficient?
It could also be made to be illegal to use spammers! Make companies that hire spammers liable for the same damages as the spammer. That will take away from the spammer's income stream.
Fight Spammers!
It seems it'll be 'free' to consumers and paid for by fees collected from telemarketers. That'll just translate into higher prices on more goods, as companies will use those fees as justification for higher prices, and there'll be more 'justification' than I care to think about.
No, I'd rather simply pay $5/year per number, or something similar, to have my numbers registered as 'do not call'. Or damn - have the phone companies collect it - they collect dozens of other taxes already. An extra 50 cents per number per month ($6/year) would go unnoticed and help fund this system.
They could even make extra money by charging the telemarketers for the lists of DNC numbers, but the decision is up to the telemarketing companies. Keep a current list, or risk paying fines.
creation science book
Hey, don't you have a constitutional right to be interrupted during sex to wait on hold with a message, "we have an important call for you," so that you may get new curtains for your house for enhanced privacy.
Fight Spammers!
I am already on a no call list here in Colorado. It has worked well. If implemented right it works. My phone never rings anymore. If someone does get through and you mention your on a statewide no call list. The apologize and hang up, never to be heard from again. They just need one for spam and all would be good
My iPaq is set to remind me to sign up.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
I knew that only moroons are working in the govt of the country #1, but I did not know that THAT moroons.
Less is more !
"The new FTC rules also require that telemarketers have Caller ID enabled..."
That right there would make me want to buy a Microsoft Powered phone. Has anybody ever used Outlook's "Rules Wizard" before? Imagine being able to apply that to phone calls.
Apply this rule when the phone rings
whose phone number is not on the Contact List.
Set ringer mode to silent.
Answer with this message 'PlaceMeOnDNCList.wav'
Hang up
Set ringer mode to default
Stop processing more rules
(Actually I wouldn't care who made it, I just think MS would implement a decent version of it.)
If you live in the state of New York, there is already a statewide "Do not call" registry and you can sign up at the webpage at this link. It definitely reduced unsolicited calls for us dramatically.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
There is a national DMA opt out method (voluntary adherence, tho), but several legally enforcable state do not call lists you can enroll in.
The "charity" loophole will end up VERY abused...
"Hi, Fred here, from Fred's Aluminum Siding Non-Profit Shell Corporation and Charity. I'd like to talk to you about how 0.0001% of every purchase you make through us goes directly to feed starving, aluminum-siding-less children in South Africa..."
Why not? It works for companies that want to buy their own personal politician... Does anyone really suspect ANY sane politician (I didn't say "ethical", just "sane") would dare take a stand against a scheme that could turn around and attack their major source of campaign financing?
The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities
Well in order for them to take any legal action on my behalf (along with the millions of other Americans with phones), I'd have to join their class action lawsuit. Which I wouldn't do even if it were the last class action lawsuit in the world, or even if me and their class action lawsuit were stranded on a desert island together.
$8.95/mo web hosting
The FTC (and the FCC) are independent commissions. The Executive trying to mess with what they do is, if not illegal, not ethical.
I'm surprised nobody campaigned in 2000 on no-call lists. What's more likely to get a vote: "I will save education!" or "I will stop the telemarketer from calling you!" ??
paintball
Free speech gives you the right to go out on the corner, stand on the soap box and have at it.
Free speech does not give you the right to enter onto private propery and spout whatever it is you want to spout. Malls, theatres, business, they all apply and it applies equally when you _call_ my private property on _my_ phone. It's nice how the greatest share of cost in telemarketing is heaped upon the person that pays for the incoming line.
I hope this goes before the Supreme Court. It won't because the argument that it restricts free speech is patently absurd.
Only if you do it online - if you actually send them snailmail, it's free. On the face of it, that seems sorta dumb (it must cost them >>> more to process a letter than the results of a web form), but if they made it too easy to sign up for the list, too many people might do so.
That being said, you should remember that, overall, direct marketers don't want to waste their time and money contacting you if you _really_ don't want to buy. Their hope is that some people who might say "I want off the list" will actually buy, when they're called or mailed.
"Yes, I would like to buy life insurance/cemorative plates/double glazing/magazine subscription from some company Ive known about a whole 30 seconds!
From the FTC site: (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/donotcall/)
"Once the Commission gets Congressional approval for funding, it will begin implementing the registry. Consumers will be able to begin signing up for the national "do not call" registry about four months later. About three months after that, the FTC will begin enforcing the registry, and consumers who have signed up will start receiving fewer calls. Consumers will be able to register for free online or by calling a toll-free number. The Web address and phone number for registration will be posted on this site when they are determined."
Not sure if other companies are offering it, but my local telco offers a service which intercepts any calls with invalid caller ID ("out of area") and requests that the person identify themself, and then calls me up to ask whether I want the call or not.
Before I got it, even with unlisted numbers, I was getting 2-3 calls a day. Now, if I get one per month, it's unusual. The rest hang up when they get the intercept. (The rare in-duh-vidual who does persist gets an earful that will hopefully make them quit on the spot)
(I can also create PIN numbers for myself, spouse, etc. that allow us to bypass the system when we're calling from out of the country or the like)
I think it's about six bucks a month.
Ok, maybe you don't actually want the spam, but you want that included with your regular mail. The incremental costs to the postal service of processing the spam snail mail is small, allowing it to tackle high fixed costs of maintaining daily delivery. Unlike email spam, which RAISES the costs of your service, snail mail spam DECREASES the costs of your service. No spam snail mail and first class postage would cost a lot more.
paintball
This is a great idea. Texas did something like this a year or 2 ago, and I signed up. It cost a couple bucks, but it was worth it. We used to get at least half a dozen calls a day from telemarketers, and now we only get maybe 2 or 3 a week. And those are from charities, time-warner cable (since we already have a "business relationship" with them), and good ol' Gee Dubya (during election time).
I don't want call from those people either, but at least it's a hell of a lot better now than before. And definitely worth the $2.
Except that 4 (or 5) would be "Pay ridiculous long distance fees," so 5 (or 6) would never happen.
Why should I have to pay to be on a "do not annoy me at dinnertime" list? Should I have to pay for people to not stand outside my house and shout advertisements at me through a bullhorn? Of course not, that would be silly. They chose this obnoxious marketing strategy, I say they pay for the damn thing. The CEO's $2000 blow jobs and eventual severance package are as likely to be "passed on to the consumer" as this, so there's no point in worrying about that aspect.
Freedom: "I won't!"
Send marines to bust some guy from souvereign territory of Quibumba Republic?
It would be the least controversial U.S. use of military force since WWII. One shot, one kill!
I don't get much phonespam b/c I have not had a land-line for the last 3 years (lived on a sailboat, used mobile phone exclusively) ...
but I don't imagine the costs of international calls would offset the cost savings of a cheap offshore call center?
I wonder if anyone knows what percentage of U.S. household phonespam is international?
La via sola al paradiso incommincia nel inferno
I'm from Missouri, we've had a do not call list for a couple of years. It has some exceptions in it, for instance charities, the local phone company, and businesses you've done business with before (banks abuse this provision a lot).
On the whole it works pretty good. The State Attorney General takes on a few abusers every year and almost completely recovers the cost of the service. In my opinion, it's one of the better government programs out there. I'm satisfied with the results.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
to quote the article, A company can call someone on the list if that person has bought, leased or rented something from the seller within 18 months. Telemarketers also can call consumers if they have inquired or applied for something during the last three months.
If you read between the lines, you might find that there are certain companies that can easily still call you, even if you register. I bet, for instance, that AOL/TW can simply restructure their telemarketting, and get away with calling anyone still. Do you really think you can casually go without buying anything from AOL/TW for 18 months? That's a long time, for such a large company.
seems to me this will mean that larger corporations will still be able to call you, since they will have sold you something in the last 18 months, whereas smaller companies that do not have the product diversity or proliferation will not be able to. I would not at all be suprized to find AOL/TW, Disney, Micrsoft, or folks along those lines behind this regulation.
of course, I'm feeling pretty conspiracy-theoristic (like that word?) today.
violators would be similarly punished if they sent spam to an email address found on this list.
comment directly in my journal
Maybe it's that children would put their senile and easily defrauded parents on the list, and thus remove the easiest prey from the game.
Good point about the $5.
By the way, the response rate that snail mail requires is astonishingly low. My sister works in the marketing department of a major catalog company - they consider a 2% response rate excellent.
So if you live with someone who complains about all the catalogs but still buys from time to time, tell them this: every time they buy from a catalog they are voting to have 50 more sent to them.
Another interesting tidbit - list exchange. You know that buying from Lemurs Unlimited gets you on the mailing list of Ferrets Forever, Gerbils by Mail, and HamsterConnection. The way this works is that catalogs "rent" lists to each other. So Catalog B rents 10,000 names from Catalog A with the restriction that they can only mail to them for a certain period of time. If a rented name responds to Catalog B, B is allowed to keep mailing them. If they don't, they must stop mailing after the designated period. This is done not for spam prevention but to keep competition for good customers $ under control.
What's amusing is the way this in enforced. When Catalog A rents the list of names, they seed it with a few address of their own employees, or PO boxes, etc. They know that these customers won't respond, since they're fake. If Catalog B keeps mailing after the rental period, they start a fuss and sometimes sue.
And, yes, my sister does feel a little guilty about her job. In fact, she's quitting soon and going to grad school...
I use SBC's Privacy Manager service, which makes any caller without good Caller ID go through a voice menu to reach me. It has stopped 99.7% of telemarketing, charity, and poll calls from even ringing my phone.
I really doubt that anything implemented by the government would be that effective. I would hate to go back to screening Caller ID before answering the phone.
We have had a "No Call List" for a while now. I think it has been a couple years. It was a free signup, and once you sign up the telemarketing calls just stop. (A few months after of course)
I still get calls from charities and non-profits occasionally, but I have only received ONE telemarketer phone call ever since I signed up. And I informed them that I was on the do not call list, and they just hung up since they can be fined.
A national one would be great. It really wouldn't matter here in CT that much, but hey, nothing wrong with another barrier against telemarketers!
My home phone is already listed on my state's "Do Not Call" list, I'm in Tennessee. The problem is that we still get a lot of calls.
When we confront the caller about us being on the Do Not Call list, they almost always say that they are a "phone company" and that the list does not apply to them. How do I battle that kind of intrusion? I tell them that as they can clearly see I already have a phone, and to please not call me again.. click.
What's even worse than that is the other day we found ourselves unexplainably subscribed to MCI as our "new" long distance carrier. I have had an outgoing long distance block on my phone for going on 5 years now. I never make any long distance calls from my home phone, I always make those calls on my cellphone cause I get better rates. Who the hell is MCI to just up and subscribe me to a service that I already purposely block?
Phone companies suck.
Ick. I refuse to run that spyware, I'd love some of those messages..
Missouri Do not call list
This has been in effect for a while and they even follow up on complaints.
I VERY rarely get unsolicited calls anymore. Usually when I do, they are charities asking for money.
I still get junk faxes at 2am on occassion and according to this I'm screwed.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
try http://www.ago.state.mo.us/nocalllaw.htm
It works well for me. The only exceptions so far have been Jean Carnahan recording during the elections and SBC. I would have gladly sued either.
The Direct Marketing Association is threatening to sue to save U.S. consumers from the potential loss of buying opportunities.
So now we need to get a national "do not sue on my behalf" list before we can get a national "I don't want a fucking Disney vacation, you worthless low-life answering machine spamming piece of scum" list? Yeah, I know, then the lawyers will sue because of the "potential loss of lawsuit opportunities." How about just a "Go to hell, DMA!" list? "Potential loss of buying opportunities?" Wouldn't that apply to the time that is wasted by telemarketers trying to sell me something I don't want when I could be researching or buying something I do want? Can I sue the DMA for causing this "potential loss of buying opportunities?"
Actually this is just an extension of the FCC's rules on do not call lists. If you tell a telemarketer "Please add me to your do not call list" They have X amount of time to process your request and then any additional calls withing 5 years to you can result in a $10,000 fine per incident this means if they call you three times in one week and you can prove you asked to be added to their do not call list sometime before X and 5 years has not expired they could be fined $30,000. My understanding is that commercial speech is considered one of the less protected forms of speach and that an individuals rights to privacy supercedes that right. The general premise under which this program is being created is not new, it dates back to at least the 80's and probably farther back.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
On the rare case that a telemarketer has something interesting to sell, my response is: "send me something in writing" <click>
Usually I am not interested in anything they are selling. Credit card? If I needed another one I'd answer one of the unopened credit card offers I receive every day via the mail. Cable? Internet Access? I already have both. And usually it is the company I purchase from (TW) who is calling to sell it to me again. Phone service? That is the very device that has gotten me into this mess.
What I'd like to know is who, if anyone, buys merchandise/services over the phone? Anyone? Or are they just referring to the potential profits they would lose.
The $5 is only to submit it through the web, for the price of a stamp you can mail it to them, its what I did.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
Since i work from home i am lucky enough to answer just about every call I receive. I really hope this do not call list gets implemented. It is annoying as hell to receive 10+ calls a day, and even worse is that 9 of those times it is just a machine recording! If they can waste my work day i'd like some sort of compensation for it, or at least a way to opt-out of it.
Scott
If they regulated US companies then all I'd have to do is block all non-US email. This would also work fine for a considerable number of businesses in the US as well.
My phone is there for my convenience, not for the telemarketers.
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
1. In came the telemarketers
2. Next came legislation restriction the time of calls
3. Then came Caller-ID (for a fee) to allow you to know who was calling before you answered
4. Then came Caller-ID block (per use or permanently on your line for a fee) to allow you to block your Caller-ID information.
5. Then came Anonymous Call Block (for a fee) so that anonymous telemarketers could not call your number.
Let's recap:
1. The phone company charges you and the telemarketer for person-to-person communication.
2. The phone company sells your phone number to telemarketers.
3. The phone company sells you and the telemarketer a method to identify who is calling before you answer.
4. The phone company sells you and the telemarketer a method of hiding who you are.
5. The phone company sells you and the telemarketer a method to block calls that are blocked.
6. We have to spend our tax dollars to compile a list of numbers that telemarketers can't call.
Am I the only one who sees a problem with this system? Isn't this like creating a war and then selling arms to both sides?
I think you should mod up the parent to this post!
me too!
Or do telemarketers get paid based on the number of calls made, without regard to the number of actual sales? I can't imagine any of their clients would be willing to pay on such a basis, but I guess stranger things have happened.
We can just give'em a good slashdottin'.
I always say "I do not do business with people who call my house." This even goes for charities. I do not donate to organizations that call me.
...
At first I thought this wouldn't work, but I've actually had a reduction in calls (that is, no repeats) and I almost always get apologies.
Here as of late I've just been having fun with the telemarketers, since they're not as frequent as they used to be.
RING
RING
ME: Hello?
HER: Yes, I'm with (she said the name of some glasswork and door company) and we're calling to see if you would be interested in new windows for your home. Have you considered having new windows installed?
ME: I don't have windows. I live in a dog house.
HER: *giggle* Very funny, sir.
ME: I don't think it's very funny at all.
HER:
ME: You think being homeless is funny?
HER: *CLICK*
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
I wound up buying one for a buddy back home. I had to as I couldn't stop staring at the big yellow sign every time I got another round. I was curious to see what it was, and thought it was inordinately amusing. And I had had a few too many Kronenbourgs. It was only one pound so no big loss as far as "drunken purchases discovered the morning after" go.
I never did open it, but apparently you wiz on these little yellows balls and they disintegrate. Supposed to help your aim, I guess, or keep you from playing Fire Brigade whilst in the loo. Helps a charity as well. I shoulda bought a couple of them.
-B
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
It's not about restricting your speech. You may still speak freely, you may say whatever you want. It's about protecting my right to privacy. Where is it mentioned in the Constitution that I'm forced to listen to you?
Telemarketing is a worse creature than direct mail, too, IMHO because it requires an explicit interrupt rather than a batch process to deal with it. I can ignore five pieces of daily junk mail in about ten consecutive seconds; five phone spams in one night is five interruptions to my evening. Don't like telemarketing, but sometimes I can hear the "I hate my job" in telemarketers' voices. Hey, I've been unemployed, too.
Spammers, however, are indeed a lower lifeform and must be destroyed by any means necessary.
This is not my sandwich.
are the cops.
Some local foundation for police benefits was calling around asking for donations. Since they're a nonprofit, and perhaps government linked, they've got all kinds of special legal leeway with telemarketting. I think.
They called me four fucking times in two days:
"In these troubling times, do you feel that it's important to give our police officers all the support they need?"
"Uh. I guess. Could you please put me on your do not call list?"
"Oh. Sure."
"Thanks." [click]
The next day, I got an identical call (different voice every time). Ten minutes later, another guy called.
"I've asked you to put me on your do not call list twice already. How come you keep calling me?"
"I'm sorry sir, I see you as a new number on my computer."
"Well, I'm not. Is there something you can do about this? Clearly something is the matter with your computer system."
"Well, I'll mark your number this time."
"Thanks, But I'd..." [click] (cut off)
Then, a half an hour later, I got another new voice. I interrupted him in middle of his pitch:
"I'm sorry, this is the fourth time someone has called me for your fundraiser, and every single time I've told them to put me on the do not call list. I understand that your computer says that I'm a new number, but it's wrong. At this point, I'm concerned that you're operating your fundraiser in violation of FCC regulation..." (cut off)
"Well. I can see why they didn't put your name on the no call list, asshole." [click]
There were no more calls, though. I think the fundraiser ended. All the voices were men, so I guess it was off duty cops that were doing the calling. That would explain the attitude. I swear, I was perfectly polite with every single call. Until the last one, I guess. Thugs.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Actually in Canada you can opt-out of spam quite simply. All you have to do is drop by your local post office. Tell them that you do not wish to receive bulk mail and give them your address.
the above is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of the little voices in my head
Sez you.
That's about why I leave my phone unplugged and set my cell phone not to ring except in response to a whitelist. I'm much happier that way.
If I wanted to implement a whitelist on my landline, I would buy a telephony card and run Asterisk.
When I get a marketing call (which is now very rare), as soon as I determine (or suspect) what it is, I just hang up. I don't say a word. Once you get over the 'rudeness' of it, it feels quite liberating. And since I adopted that policy, cold calls basically just stopped.
Unlike spam, there is a not-insignificant cost to phone solicitations, and they will cull the phone-lists themselves (I'm assuming) for bad-numbers or callees. They may even sell the info to others.
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
Officials said the agency is taking bids from companies interesting in creating the registry.
The registry will likely cost about $16 million in its first year and would be paid for with fees collected from telemarketers, officials said. The agency has not decided how those fees will be imposed and still needs congressional approval to collect them.
I'll do it. I want $2.5 million to set it up and $1 million a year to run it. They can keep the rest of the $16 million.
Seriously, what's going to cost $16 million? All you need is a half million in equipment, 3 to 5 people, and some good software. With that you could easily handle a half billion phone numbers and thousands of requests a month for a copy of the list. Maybe I found my next business opportunity.
I had a telemarketer hang up on me once. It went like this:
Her: Hi, I'm blah blah and I'm calling to tell about the fantastic prize you've won. It's a blah blah blah.
Me: Oh.
Her: You don't sound too excited for someone who has won such a wonderful prize.
Me: I'm waiting for the catch.
Her: (click)
Another thing is to tell them that you were just sitting there masturbating and would really like it if they could describe themselves for you. Ask what colour their underwear is. They'll hang up.
Back before election day, the phone would ring nonstop with political bullshit calls. Was I on the DNC list? Yes. Did it help? No. The following was printed in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch; I'd link to it but the paper recently reorganized its site, and so links to the old stories are now dead.
NEXT weekend's going to be awfully dull. No chatty phone calls from Kit or Jack, Jean or Jim. No direct mail on guns and abortion. No more candidates scaring seniors and jeopardizing national security.
Campaign 2002 wound down to a surreal close this weekend. On Saturday, computerized telephone calls inundated homes, waking babies from naps, rousing people from their after-breakfast coffee and irritating the hell out of voters who thought the no-call list would guard their serenity. (No, you can't use the Missouri attorney general's no-call list to block political calls. But don't blame Jay Nixon, blame the First Amendment.)
No sooner had Jack hung up on his pitch for raising the tobacco tax, than Kit was on the line railing about how the Democrats stole the 2000 election. Kit mentioned his favorite dog, Ritzy, the voting spaniel. We wanted to remind him that Ritzy was registered in 1994 and did NOT vote in 2000, but we couldn't get a word in edgewise.
The line between reality and parody was especially murky Saturday evening when "Saturday Night Live" spoofs of campaign ads were mixed in with attack ads by Rep. David Phelps, D-Ill., against Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill. The spoofs satirized one form of the attack ad that has been common in Missouri: "Call Jim Talent and tell him his vote shattered lives," or "Call Jean Carnahan. Tell her to put our security interest first."
The geniuses who parsed these "Call Joe Blow" ads are - surprise - lawyers. The wording, "Call Joe Blow," makes them "issue ads" that can be paid for with unlimited amounts of soft money. "Vote against Joe Blow," would make the ad into express advocacy of the defeat of a candidate, which must be funded by restricted hard money contributions.
The McCain-Feingold campaign finance law was supposed to fix that by outlawing soft money and limiting "sham" issue ads. Ha ha. Even before the law takes effect today, pols of both parties have already figured out how to skirt it: funnel soft money to new party groups and state party committees.
Make your blood boil? Call Congress at 202-224-3121 and tell it to stop damaging democracy. And while you're at it, call Joe Blow and tell him to stop calling us.
This is a fairly large part of why I have only a cell phone now. I don't appear in any directories, and telemarketers aren't allowed to call me (as far as I know).
i am a soviet space shuttle
5. Annoyed customers listen to sales pitch, claim interest, request 1-800 number and company name, report US based company so that fines may be levied.
Since you'll eventualy have to contact them for the sale to go through, they can't win that game.
BD Phone Home!
Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.
Just because one person out of the two people you sold products to put their number on the do not call list is no basis to make that kind of claim.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
Then the telephone companies turns around and sells the telemarker a method of by-passing the Telezappers, and the cycle continues. If I'm not mistaken someone finally caught onto these shenanigans and filed a lawsuit.
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
Has anybody noticed that telemarketers are already making evasive maneuvers to elude the "please do not call me again" warning?
t imegoodbye."
Sample:
[phone rings]
Me: "Hello?"
Telemarketer: "Yes, I just know you'll be pleased with our offer of Product Y."
M: "Sorry--"
T: [interrupts] "OkaythenI'llcallbacksomeothertimethankyouforyour
[click]
As long as they can "complete the call" and hang up before you can identify them and make that "do not call" demand, they simply put you back in the call carousel for the next round of pitches. They want to preserve you as a potential resource. All they're looking for is the tiniest negative reaction to trigger that defensive response.
A good countermove is to engage the caller first. Make them jump through your hoops.
Sample:
[phone rings]
Me: "Hello?"
Telemarketer: ""Yes, I just know you'll be pleased with our offer of Product Y."
M: "Can I ask you two questions?"
T: "Sure."
M: "What company do you represent?"
T: "Company X."
M: [quickly] "Put me on your do-not-call list immediately. Can you do that for me? I do not want to receive any more calls from your company."
Write the company name down and the time of the call. Get the caller to spell it out if you're not sure. Keep a list of these calls available whenever the phone rings.
Solicitors are required by law to identify themselves clearly, and to comply with any "do not call" demand. One by one, they can be made to comply.
"Folks just call him Buckethead." -- Les Claypool
I'm in scotland and thanks to vonage i'm paying $40 a month for all the calls to the US i can handle.
Before that i was paying 3 pence (US 5c) a minute for calls to the us - hardly expensive compared to the other costs involved in telemarketting.
Don't you pay for Caller ID? If this is a "free" part of Caller ID, you're still paying for it.
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
1) Never give your phone number out at the cash register. I can't beleive the number of people that will give thier number, that makes a legitimate buisness relationship and they can call for another year and harass you.
2) "Take me off your list" and "I don't ever want to receive a call from this marketing company either"
3) They are required to provide you with name and contact information if asked. If you are on a DNC list demade the info and tkae the 2 minutes to fill out the web form that most states have.
As for the charities and political calls. Sorry, the Supreme Court has always help political and non-commercial speeach with high reguard ( as we all would hope ).
Since I have been on the NY DNC list I have received only a few annoying telemarketing calls and those were from people that disreguarded my previous attempt to legaly make them stop calling. They have since stoped since I filed a protest with NYS. Now if I could only get the Damm Red Cross to stop calling.
Self-help is inadequate to solve this problem -- spam filters are never going to be good enough. There will always be false positives and false negatives. The spammer thus reduces the effectiveness of my e-mail process, without giving me any benefit. The limit of your right to move your fist ends at my face, and I have no problem with regulation to the extent it does not overreach.
But you are right to ask if less invasive means are possible -- too much regulation is as bad as too little. I believe there is.
Rather than requiring people to mark spam, or worse, to refrain from spamming, I would prefer to prevent them from making false representations about their spam. In particular, I would like to harshly punish someone who represents their e-mail to be non-spam, when in fact it is. Then, I can simply filter for people who DO NOT represent themselves as non-spammers, and have a remedy against the liars.
For this purpose, I would simply define spam liberally, as a form of broadcast. In particular, as any message which was sent (or substantially similar messages) within a reasonable period of time (few days) to more than a reasonable number of persons (say, 200) who did not previously subscribe to the broadcast.
Virtually every e-mail client can responsibly be changed to represent as non-broadcast all e-mails without long lists of recipients, and easily, and with 100% accuracy filter such mail. If folks need spam protection, this will become a standard and the network effect will take care of broadcast e-mail completely. If not, then the whole issue will blow over, and further regulation isn't necessary.
As to the spammer, their incentive to spam will be reduced, and thus the impact of the spam (which still is getting sent through the net, albeit filtered) will be reduced.
That is just one of several less invasive means for addressing the problem. The virtue of this one is that it doesn't require anything of the spammer, doesn't prohibit anything except misrepresntations and lies about clear factual issues, and doesn't require content-based analysis of what is spam.
Its not absurd merely because you say so. For the most part, the courts have long rejected your very narrow perspective on what are the limits of government regulated speech. My suggestion is that, while you don't like the argument, you may be skating on fairly thin legal ice to assert that the argument is wholly without merit.
Your mailbox and telephone are held out to the public as means to reach you. Nobody can know before they send you messages whether or not they are desired, and if it were impermissible to send undesired mails, nobody would get any bills. In practice, your use of the mail and connection with it relies on the public weal, and you are unlikely to have an action for someone sending an unwelcome message, although certain stuff --lying misrepresentation actual harassment and the like-- can be actionable.
However, free speech is PRECISELY why the government has difficulty regulating how your mailbox can be used, and it is largely why you get so much junk mail. It is also why most anti-spam legislation is pretty meek, because forced speech and undue limitations can well invalidate these laws.
Why is it that these things always contain a loophole for charities? Is it really that important that charities be able to harrass people who have already expressed a preference not to be interrupted during dinner?
While I would much rather see a law saying that telemarketing lists must be opt-in only, I'm willing to settle for an enforced opt-out list, as long as that list has:
I've tried suing under California's telemarketing laws before, and I found out that they are next to useless. So, legislators, please pass useful, enforceable anti-telemarketing laws, or don't pass any at all.
"It sure was strange to see something on Usenet about me that didn't involve Klingon gang rape." -- Wil Wheaton
The DMA has parallel do-not-mail and do-not-call lists. As noted elesewhere, you may sign on free by mail. Why it is $5 over the net, I can't imagine. It must cost $ to process all that mail. Perhaps they want to discourage people.
Your name is purged after 5 years I believe.
There is also a free service run by the (3?) credit reporting services that will prevent any credit-card solicitations from being sent to you. I suppose it puts a flag on your credit report. You probably know that solicitations can be stolen and filled out fraudulently by a 3rd party. This is a good thing, and can be done over the phone with an automated system.
Back to the DMA -- I don't think they're evil, exactly, but don't think they set up the don't bother me lists out of public-mindedness. Like the movie industry with its self-imposed ratings, I believe they set it up to try to head off federal regulation. Better to self-regulate they figured, and benefit from the fact most people will never sign up.
I know people that have had this happen to them -- the charges were somewhere around $70 if I remember right -- and yes, it falls under credit card fraud. Companies can get in a *lot* of trouble for doing this.
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
This should be modded +5 insightful ;)
should be interesting
I signed up for it when it came out. Calls dropped considerably. I did get a local call that popped up on the Caller ID. Reported them to the state.
Not sure what to make of this. I work in the telecommunications industry installing and programming Predictive Dialers and CTI systems for call centers. I can however give thoughts on whether or not a no-call list will do much.
I am on the no call list in Georgia and it has helped some with the reputable marketers. Where this isn't going to help is the small mom and pop shops calling you (which is the majority).
The way it works is there are hundreds of fly by night call centers that rent out their agents on a per call basis. Most of these call centers are cheap, poorly run, follow no laws, and in general bill the business for each call. They set up shop, hire out 30 redneck house wives, run for a few months, then shut down and do it again elsewhere.
Whether or not this will help will depend on a few things.
1: The ability of the policing body to act quickly. If there is a 2 month delay the offending call center is probrably changed or gone and will never get fined.
2: The ability to obtain the records of who the call centers customers are and which customer the call was placed for. If they never fine the companies that actually "purchased" the call then the practice will go unabated.
The other problem is the part about if they have already done business with you. If the call center has 20 customers they are placing calls for, and you have bought something from 1 of them, they may claim that status. I know most of you are thinking "I haven't bought anything from these small places". Keep in mind that a call center may have customers ranging from the Mortgage company trying to get your business all the way to the Phone Company you use (and yes, 90% of BabyBell calls are outsourced to outside call centers).
So chances are this No Call list won't make as much difference as most people think.
Oh Yeah, this should appease the people here.....99% of Call Centers are Windows based. Databases, Web Servers, Phone Systems, Desktops, You name it. No Linux at all!
EtOH
(hope this doesn't get me fired)
ok we are both wrong, the period the lists are supposed to be called is 10 years not 5, and they have to call you twice in a 12 month period after you have requested to be removed for it to be actionable. For more info see the fcc's page on do not call lists Here I guess if they call you twice after you have requested but before they add you to their list it could be actionable. I personally would be lenient as it does take time for them to do the database add and then re-filter their call lists.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Typically you will see the amount of mail you receive begin to decrease approximately three months after your name is entered onto the quarterly file
As the form says, it can take up to 3 months.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
Is to ban all forms of telephone solicitiation by any company, for profit of not. Instead of having a national DNC list, we should have an OICL nation wide. (DNC is DO Not Call, OICL is Opt-In Caller List) Anyone who is not on the OICL should not be called. I used to telemarket, so I know what they do, and the lies they tell. I will tell you this: No matter what they say, never buy a program called: Mainstreet Savings, Galleria, Premier Health Plus, Simple Escapes, or 24 Protect Plus. Even if it is only $9.95/Mo. They are scams. They are money traps. Let everyone know. Write your congressman, lets get this bill passed!
Get your free Dropbox account with 2 GB Free storage!
Free speech means you can say what you want. It doesn't mean you can force me to listen to it.
If you wanna stand on the street corner and talk about x,y or z, that's fine. But you can't do a thing if I decide to put my fingers in my ears and not listen.
In this case, the government is helping people do that if they want, probably because of the FCC and FTC tie-ins.
I'm on bellsouth, and as far as I know, we've never gotten an out-of-state call listed as "Out of Area".
We won't answer it if it says Out of Area, and no one has ever left a message when the machine picks up - well, not true - some moron telemarketters actually leave messages - but no legit calls.
However, the Ga No call list has pretty much cut those down to nil
T: Hello, is Mr. Foo in?
M: You're speaking w/ him
T: I'd like to tell you about our XYZ product...
M: This XYZ product sounds very interesting.
I'm a little busy at the moment though. Could I get your home number so I can call you back later to talk about it?
T: We can't give that information out sir.
M: Is it because you don't like being called at home by complete strangers?
T: *silence*
M: (click)
It has some exceptions in it ... and businesses you've done business with before (banks abuse this provision a lot).
Oh great. I can't wait for the "special partnership" between $YOUR_BANK and $SELLER_OF_CRAP. I bet some banking VP is sitting around dreaming about synergy and leveraged relationships.
K5 Diary Entry
Sex - Find It
You can sign up online for free (they send a letter of acknowledgement in the post) and it is backed by legislation. It isn't perfect, but I reckon that after a few months the number of unwanted calls dropped by more than 90%.
Charities are not excempt, and the only people who can legitimately still call you are companies with whom you have previously done business.
There are similar schemes for snail mail and fax junk which also seem to work well. They also have an email one, but that's a bit pointless since most spam comes from outside the UK.
In summary, I'm very happy with the system and I hope that those of you in more backward countries get a similar system soon ;-).
Oh my...
:-)
If you call that good, you really have a bad telemarketting spam problem
I'm amazed at the amount of telemarketing that goes on in the US, for one Simple reason; it doesn't seem to happen AT ALL in the UK. I mean, I think I'm 'ex-directory', not sure if that's possible in the US? If it is, how do they get your phone number? But I mean, I've NEVER in my life had a phone call from a company I haven't dealt with before, maybe just 1 or 2 in my LIFE from companies (like banks) telling me about some new service or something. My mum had about 1 or 2 in her LIFE from local merchants offering to do some refurbishment to the house or something, but all in all, it doesn't really happen. And you call 1 or 2 calls a WEEK good??
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
GloboChem
"If you bought something, you bought it from us".
When only a few mega-corps own everything they'll all be able to call you.
Yeah. It was pretty common around here to get recordings of political messages during the elections. People got called from both Clintons, GW Bush, and Jean Carnahan (and probably Jim Talent, too, though I never heard that). The recording I got urged me to vote, not necessarily for her or anything, but the point was clear.
Politicians, the local phone company, and some others are immune to the Missouri no-call law. I'm not sure if the fact that her message wasn't a direct plea for me to vote for her helps her in the no-call law, but it really seems like it was deliberately done for some reason.
Compared to how many we used to get, YES. Also keep in mind the vast majority of the ones we do get are from autodiallers. Pick up the phone, say hello, get no response, immediately hang up. So you only have to talk to some annoying telemarketer maybe once every few weeks.
It's not paradise, but it's close to it.
A "consumer" is a sheep that does nothing other than buy things. I am not a consumer, and never will be.
I object to this, and all other use of the term.
I also object to "Intellectual Property"
</RANT>
Before telemarketers can start their schpeel, I begin the conversation with this quote:
...(pause)
"All commerial solicitation phone calls to this number will be changed at a rate of $1 per word spoken by the caller, do you accept these charges?"
I did this to MCI this morning. It really makes telemarking calls end quickly.
Incidentally, Have you noticed that almost all telemarketers use an automatic dialing system nowadays? Instead of a normal phone call:
Me: "Hello"
Caller: "Hello, I'm so and so and the reason I'm calling is..... "
We get:
Me: "Hello."
Telemarketer, just now picking up the phone: "Hello"
The fact that they are waiting for a 2nd Hello from me gives me the perfect chance to start the conversation with the question above.
Here is a listinging of the new requirments and exemptions.a lrule.pdf . This is going to offer a whole new box of BS for TCPA violators to confuse the judges with?
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2002/12/tsrfin
For example, 310.4(b)(4)(iii) says the telemarketer is not liable for abandonment violations if "whenever a sales representative is not available to speak with the person answering the call within two (2) seconds after
the person's completed greeting, the seller or telemarketer promptly plays a recorded message that states the name and telephone number of the seller on whose behalf the call was placed".
So, they play a recording that says "Hi, this is Bambi with No-Brain Funding. We have exciting news about your mortgage, but unfortunately, our
customer service agents" -- which may or may not exist -- "are assisting other customers. If you would like to hear information about how we can
lower your mortgage rates to blah blah blah, press 'one' now! Or you can hang up and go *bleep* yourself."
Then when you sue them under the TCPA, they claim the call wasn't a prerecord, it was actually a live solicitation with the prerecorded message *required* by FTC regs.
And jeez! Did they offer enough exemptions?
The new rule doesn't apply to charities. -- 310.6(a)
It doesn't apply to any company which takes payment after a face to face meeting (such as a carpet cleaning estimate, cable TV installation, alarm equipment estimate, etc.) -- 310.6(b)(3)
It doesn't apply to inbound calls, specifically ones originating as a response to junk faxes. -- 310.6(b)(4-6)
It doesn't apply to calls resulting from junk faxes. -- 310.6(b)(6)
It doesn't apply to calls to businesses. -- 310.6(b)(7)
Companies are not in violation of the DNC rules if:
They say they have procedures for DNC compliance in place. -- 310.4(b)(3)
They say "Oops, we goofed!" -- 310.4(b)(3)
It looks like it is going to be hard to figure out for whom this bill is intended to block.
Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
I have had junk calls in the UK, usually trying to sell double glazing.
My usual tactic was to tell them that no, we did not have double glazing but it could not be fitted to the building. After the idiot canvaser assured me it was possible I would tell her that she had called the underground pumping station for the water works.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
I love to tell stories; I love to flirt with the little minimum-wage earning college girls and housewives; and I keep them on the phone for fifteen to twenty minutes at a time and DON'T BUY A DAMN THING. I immediately control the conversation [a very bad habit of mine in person *LOL*] and at the end of my little yak session "I'm sorry, I just don't buy stuff like that." I think that's why I have gotten fewer and fewer calls recently.
I think with the interesting people, their lives can't possibly be wrapped up into a nice little package.