Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

U.S. National Do-Not-Call Registry is Law

Posted by timothy on from the oh-yes-do-please dept.

extra88 writes "Bush has signed the Do-Not-Call Registry into law. The registry will be run by the FTC and funded by fees collected from telemarketers. Telemarketers can be fined up to $11K for calling someone on the list. Politicians, surveys (loophole?) and charities are exempt from using the list. The FCC oversees certain industries (airlines, banks and phone companies) and will have to "buy in" to the registry for it to affect those industries. Slashdot covered this story when the bill went through House of Representatives."

14 of 525 comments (clear)

  1. sign up by clones · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Where do I sign up?

    1. Re:sign up by rworne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Cool, and do-no-call activists can write up a nifty perl script that will register every number from 000-000-0000 to 999-999-9999.

      Yes, I know that the above can be pared down considerably by removing invalid area codes and prefixes.

      We could set this up as a distributed effort, with each ./ member taking a few hundred thousand numbers.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  2. Surveys... by TopShelf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Surveys are indeed a loophole here. Since Indiana's do-not-call list went into effect (which is a MAJOR success), I have gotten some thinly veiled "research survey" calls, which offer a free sample of a product as the compensation for participating. They're pretty few and far between, though.

    I still can't believe that a legislature actually passed a reasonably effective and useful law, despite the opposition of lobbying groups!

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    1. Re:Surveys... by cacav · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm more concerned with the charity loophole. The group "Lighthouse Credit Foundation" was busted by NY last year for calling people with automated messages (I average 3 calls a month from them myself) and no way to get off their lists. They claim they're exempt because they're a so-called charity offering debt relief.

      I'm worried more companies will find a way to try and look like a charitable organization. Or worse yet, pay a charity to do their solicitations for them as a middle-man.

    2. Re:Surveys... by schwanerhill · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Ignoring the partisan flaimbait (although I do not, in general, consider partisan a dirty word)...

      House Roll Call Vote on HR 395: 418 Yea, 7 Nay (5 Republican, 2 Democrat), 9 Not Voting

  3. Thank goodness.. by SirFozzie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now if We can just get a "Do Not Spam" List to go with the "Do Not Call" list.

    First Post?

    --
    People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
  4. Do-Not-Email Next? by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Interesting
    All good, for now, but how long before this is extended to a national Do-Not-Email list? Assuming this passes the Supremes, regarding the 'first amendment - free speech' test, it seems only logical.

    I would personally like such a thing considering my volume of spam, but aside from anyone who lives by spamming, does anyone find issues with the extended concept?

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  5. The UK has one too by Macka · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just signed up to the UK version, www.tpsonline.org.uk. It takes a month to work its way into the system, then I'm promised a big reduction in unsolicited phone calls, currently running at around 2-3 a day. As I have to work from home some weeks, so this will be a great relief. I'm glad you guys have it too.

    Macka

  6. What about autodialers? by YetAnotherName · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Recently, telemarketing calls I've been getting go like this:
    Hello, this is [different voice] BARBARA [/different voice], and I'd like to talk to you about the exciting benefits of something-or-other. Press ONE if you'd like more details.
    Now, I'm already on the state's do-not-call list, but how do I tell these people they've broken the law? If I press ONE, I'm saying I want more details. If I do nothing, their machine hangs up.

    My current solution is to use an auto-attendant wherein a caller needs to press my extension number to ring me. Now, their machine talks to my machine, and I never even hear a phone ring.

    But I'd still like to cause them some pain.
  7. Re:What impact will it have? by The_K4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's easy, I just use my cell phone for EVERYTHING. I never answer the home line. If I get a telemarketer (phone company, political or other wise) I explain that this is a cell phone, and I pay by the min for incomming and out going calls and as such is it illegal for them to call this number. I also ask for the company name, address and the referance number of this call that I may send them a bill for the charges of this call, which they are now legaly responsible. I only had to do that 3 times, and even with out actually sending them a bill, the calls stopped. :)

  8. Re:It's all your fault by cgenman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Pickpocketers, sheisters, and muggers were pretty upset when those industries were outlawed. But quite frankly if your business model is predicated upon annoying people, expect to get banned. Automated call machines were banned for exactly the same reason. Now that call-centers have become consolidated and automated enough to be a major nusiance, they rightfully should be too.

    I'm glad the telemarketing industry is angry. Hopefully that means we will be rid of those leeches upon society.

    Do something positive, and get back to us.

    --
    The ______ Agenda
  9. Death of the Predictive Dialer abuse! Yay!! by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Just read the ftc.gov FAQ about the new law, and I'm delighted!
    Greatly reduce abandoned calls. Telemarketers will be required to connect the call to a sales representative within two seconds of the consumer's greeting. This will reduce the number of "dead air" or hang-up calls you receive from telemarketers. These calls result from the use of automatic dialing equipment that sometimes reaches more numbers than there are available sales representatives. In addition, when the telemarketer doesn't have a representative standing by, a recorded message must play to let you know who's calling and the telephone number they're calling from. The law prohibits a sales pitch. And to give you time to answer the phone, the telemarketer may not hang up before 15 seconds or four rings.
    I have always felt that abusing predictive dialers (by under-staffing the call center and simply hanging up on some percentage of your victims) was against the spirit of the law. Now it's against the letter of the law.
  10. loophole? by spazoid12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The FCC oversees certain industries (airlines, banks and phone companies) and will have to "buy in" to the registry for it to affect those industries.

    Wonder if there will be companies that do (insert random thing) business but think to get themselves excluded by paying $1000 to become a "phone company" (a reseller of long distance service). If the FCC doesn't buy into the FTC's list, then such a company might have a loop hole and be able to share the data in own "division" of the company to it's others (ie. it's actual original business).

  11. Re:Not so fast by stormraven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If it's illegal for telemarketers to make calls to a cell phone, would it likewise be illegal for them to send e-mails to an address which is checked by a cell phone? Hmm...

    Otherwise, let's start giving them our cell phone numbers, and then sue them into submission. C'mon it'll be fun, and our lawyers will love us for it.