Slashdot Mirror
U.S. National Do-Not-Call Registry is Law
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."
Where do I sign up?
Any chance that to inform the masses about this they will do a mass calling at 6:30pm (dinner time) ? ;)
We'd like you to take a survey...
1) What do you think about our new offer we're sending to people?
2) Would our recent pricing changes convince you to switch to our company?
3) PROFIT!
-=sig=-
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
My first thought was that this list could cut down my telemarketing calls received by about 90%. But what is that you say? It may not apply to phone companies? Well, I suppose cutting my telemarketing calls received by 5% is still some sort of progress.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
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!
* ring ring *
Hello?
Hallo, dees iz Al Quaeda fund raising group, please geef uz moe-nee.
I'm on the National Do Not Call list!
Ah.. forgiff my mistake, American Infidel. I shall call next perzon on list. Haff a nice day.
No problem, g'day.
Trolling is a art,
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
"Hi, this is AnnoyingCo, we want you to pad, for absolutely no compensation, our database that we'll be selling to someone else so they can annoy you too."
"My answer to all your questions will be 'Go fuck yourself raw, bitch'. Still want to ask? Have at it."
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
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
Phase 1:All telemarketers stop for n months.
Phase 2: No fines = no funds to enforce law.
Phase 3: Resume telemarketing
Phase 4: Profit!
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
Why are surveys and charities exempt? They're no less annoying, and have no right to call you out of the blue either.
bkr
So, if someone calls from within the US, you can haul them to court where there's an $11K fine... but what if the call originates in... say... Tijuana? Ottowa? Bombay?
I get the feeling that, in order to survive, junk phone callers will resort to some dirty tricks.
...where are all of the loopholes that you just know are in there. maybe i'm a bit cynical by nature, but there has to be at least one big enough to drive a truck through. i know about the survey thing and the non-profit, but where's the real built-in escape for that $11k fine?
hmmm...
Hello Sir/Madam, while on your way to vote for Diamond Joe Quimby and donate to Guns for Tots, pick up some of our effective, 100% legal herbal Viagra substitute.
You know what? It's all their faults anyway. If they hadn't been so aggresive and so intrusive (I used to get around 15 calls from 6pm to 9pm ... right smack dab in the middle of dinner), they wouldn't have pissed off an entire nation of people and legislation like this wouldn't be required.
But they were, so it is needed.
Hm. I guess that thought applies to SPAM as well.
My comment to telemarketers: Here's a dime, go call someone who gives a damn (but make sure you check The Registry first!). As my mother used to say: you made the bed, now f**king sleep in it.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int i, j, k;
for (i = 100; i <= 999; i++)
for (j = 100; i <= 999; j++)
for (k = 0; k <= 9999; k++)
printf("(%03d) %03d-%04d\n", i, j, k);
}
How the hell would I prove that a telemarketer called me? Is it my word against their word? Do I obtain phone records? Does the government obtain phone records? Now granted, my cell phone does a pretty good job of breaking calls down to incoming and outgoing, but I don't recall if it tells you the phone number of the incoming call on the bill Seems like yet another political feel good move that the government has no way of enforcing. Hey if it works and the iron the kinks out, then sign me up! Hell lets figure out how to do the same thing as spammers, since I think that cause more pain and cost more money.
Money not found! A)bort, R)etry, D)eclare Bankruptcy
I'm running for congress... would you be interested in switching to AT&T?????????
How would you enforce it? I assume that most of my unsolicited telephone calls come from within the US, and are therefore subject to US laws.
The callers could move outside the US, but the cost of making the phone calls would increase dramatically.
However, it's easy for spammers to move outside the US to avoid an unfavorable law, and doesn't really change their costs much.
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.
I see one potential problem here. Is the law prohibiting "Telemarketing calls" or "Sales calls".
I'm in a state that already has a list that I'm on and my volume of "Telemarketing calls" has gone up while I've recieved no "Sales calls". esentially the companies that call me just want to inform me that if I could request information from them on a certain product or service but they weren't calling me to sell said product of service.
BIG ASS LOOPHOLE that esentially gives telemarketers a big list of valid phone numbers.
Maybe to really screw the telemarketers, people could put their cell phone numbers on the list and wait for the calls to come rolling in (an FCC violation)
"The Direct Marketing Association, an industry group, filed a lawsuit against the FTC last month on grounds the registry unlawfully restricts free speech."
IANAL, but does "free speech" cover calling me on a telephone service that I pay for? I would side with them if the law was talking about hawking from street corners but they are using my money to annoy me.
Sometimes, even a blind squirrel finds a nut.
Yet Another Web Site
can be found here http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/donotcall/in dex.html.
[/end whore]
Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
"Telemarketers say the registry will devastate their business."
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If anything, a do not call list would help them reduce the costs by eliminating unnecessary phone calls. The people who sign up for this list are those who are least likely to purchase anything through a telemarketer. Now that they have a list of numbers not likely to buy anything, they can skip over that and save the cost of a phone call.
I do work for a company that does market-research. Read the law - there are reasonably strict restrictions on what counts as charities, surveys, etc. I may be in the minority but I have done focus groups and do reply to some surveys if I'm not otherwise occupied (well, I used to - working for a research company disqualifies me for most of the now). I hardly think that sending a FREE product, gift certificate, etc. as a thank-you makes a survey somehow evil. (I should note, we hardly do any call-out work and on the rare occasions we do we adhere strictly to the allowed hours and other restrictions.)
Now, you want to see a loophole - how about the exemption for anyone with whom you have a "business relationship". Bought a widget from me in the last 18 months - I'm exempt. I called you for product info in the last three months - you can feel free to start calling me whether I'm listed or not. Fortunately even in those cases (and I think with charities as well) you can tell that specific business/charity to stop calling and they must honor it.
Better still, they must start transmitting caller ID info - no more "ID unavailable" and must have a person on the line within 2 seconds of your answer (the telemarketers hate this since they can't cram in as many calls per person per hour with their predictive dialers).
The other giant loophole is that there are a variety of exemptions for financial institutions, airlines and telecom companies but it appears from the FTC web site that this could be just procedural in that they are already regulated by other agencies and it just needs some interagency coordination to bring those into the fold as well. Still, those exemptions bear watching. Perhaps someone more familiar than I am with the laws would care to comment.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
The provisions for surveys are meant to prevent the government from fighting itself. The government, at various levels, spends billions of dollars per year funding survey research. My employer (the University of Wisconsin) recieves millions each year from the state alone.
If you feel a survey is not of academic nature then the call is illegitimate (per Wisconsin law) and the caller can still be punished. Since Wisconsin's do-not-call list went into effect at the beginning of this year we have recieved phone calls from various areas of the government ensuring our credibility.
A "Do Not /." List for websites.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
I've made the mistake of donating to some charities, and now I get hammered with the charity telemarketers. They're just as bad as the credit card and long distance people.
It's sad that charities have been reduced to this.
This law exempts charities, and will only apply to phone companies and banks if the FTC want it to... That means 90% of the telemarketers who call me are exempt. What's the use of that?
The FTC has limited authority to police telemarketing calls from certain industries, including airlines, banks and telephone companies. The Federal Communications Commission, which oversees calls made by those industries, has been working with the FTC and is considering adding its clout to the program.
The FTC is CONSIDERING adding its clout?!?! Banks and telephone companies are the biggest telemarketers in the first place. If I get one more call about changing my phone company, credit card, or morgage (after I get on the list), I will [insert unlikely and irrational threat] the FTC!
Do me a favor and double it!
Here in Colorado, we implemented this about a year ago. It has helped. I no longer get calls saying to buy things. Instead, I get numerous calls from the republican and democratic party asking me to support their platform and send lots of money . They also tell me that the Libertarian party is a group of thugs who will allow the other party to get ahead (can't stand either as there is no difference).
Likewise, I get 2-5 calls a day from charity groups saying that we will be in your area looking for used articles. If I do not answer within 3 rings, they will hang up and try again in about 15 minutes.
Take your pick of which set of spam you want; businesses or charity/government.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You know how easy it is create a "for profit" charity? I've had the same guy call me once a night (for weeks) during dinner explaining that I give money to some kind of police/fire/IbrokeAnailAnonymous charity. He collects 99% of the money, and donates the rest (gee thanks!). The charity loophole is HUGE.
As nice as it is for a charity to call me begging for money, I'd much rather give the money on my own. Ofcourse...people don't go out of their own way nowadays to do just that.
Colossians 2:8
Politicians, surveys (loophole?) and charities are exempt from using the list.
I d=883948. I can't check as I dont have RealPlayer, but if you have it, check it out. You can also order a transcript.
I was listening to NPR months ago, and they went through the guidelines for what constitutes a "survey" and "charity" call. I got the impression they were very well defined.
Looking at the NPR site, I think this may be the article: http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wf
For all those asking when and were to sign up let me make it simple. It says Summer. It is administrated by the FTC.
So that means in July go to either firstgov.gov or ftc.gov and search for "do not call". Simple huh? Well stop whining... "when, where, oh boo hoo".
And I'm sure there are other ways such an enormous compendium of phone numbers could be abused.
Not that I'm saying this law is a bad thing. I'm thrilled about it. But I'm just listening for the other shoe to fall.
A do-not-email registry may be law soon too. Seven states (Maine, New York, South Carolina, Missouri, Colorado, Arizona, and Oregon) are currently considering legislation on the issue.
In addition, last Friday Senator Mark Dayton (D-Minn) introduced the "Computer Users' Bill of Rights." Among the bills provisions is a call for the Federal Trade Commission to create a national do-not-email list.
At unspam we've developed technology to help states create secure do-not-email registries and are working with a number of legislators to implement and develop effective enforcement strategies for them. For more information email: dne-slashdot@matthew.unspam.com.
Hook up ELIZA with her own voice and let the telemarketer spin their wheels for half an hour or so:
Telemarketer: Would you like to learn how to save on your long distance bills?
Eliza: Oh, i like to learn what to save on my long distance bills.
Telemarketer : Well, with our super saver program you can make long distance calls for just 39 cents a minute!
Eliza: Oh, i can make long distance calls for just 39 cents a minute.
Telemarketer: Uh, yes. So can I sign you up?
Eliza: You are sure?
Telemarketer: Um, yeah. Are you interested in signing up for our long distance service?
Eliza: Would you prefer if I were not interested in signing up for our long distance service?
If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
UK's TPS
It actually works very well, and companies DO get into trouble if they violate the policy. It has not hindered tele-marketing at all, except that it has put an end to a lot of silly 'double glazing companies' from misusing the system by making them buy the list (which is quite expensive and must be upgraded frequently).
I am on the list, but most people do not know it exists. I have not recieved any crappy calls since signing on, but still recieve texts as they dont come under the same laws (a recent slashdot story
SMS Story
hints that texts may soon be part of this law, however, which is great!). There is also a snail-mail equivalent. Nice to see the self proclaimed 'free world' catching up with the other side of the pond!
This is probably just a means for the government to collect a list of 'dissidents'.
According to government statistics, there is a direct correlation between gun ownership, people who believe in 'real' freedom (not the PC fakey kind), and anti-telemarking activists.
You have been warned...
[ The Management ]
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
It would be nice to think the Government cares about us little people getting "annoyed" with marketing calls, it seems it takes something more sinister to get a law like this through... I don't see how it will help though other than make folks aware of the difference between a con artist and a true salesman...
Sorry to say this folks, but the phone marketing people may be right about this one, all it will do is stop legitimate phone sales calls coming in...but the stuff that is really bad ($40 billion a year bad) will simply ignore the dumb list, or worse yet, abuse it, as so many people have pointed out... ugh.
-v
Gee, if everyone wants to be on this do-not-call list, don't you think your business model kind of sucked in the first place? Get a real job, losers! All I have to say is good ridance.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Anyway, since telemarketers currently do not transmit Caller-ID information, I get no telemarketing calls. None. Zip. Nada.
Once telemarketers start transmitting Caller-ID information, Privacy Manager will be much less useful. But, if the national do-not-call list actually works, it will make up for it. Let's hope.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
Thanks for making up my mind for me. I'd rather evaluate the merits of receiving telephone solicitations and make the decision to sign up on a do-not-call list myself, and I'm sure there are millions of others who agree.
And just so you know, some people LIKE to receive telemarketing calls, credit card offers, etc. Maybe they're lonely. Maybe they need toilet paper. It doesn't matter. If you sign me up for something that I didn't ask for, you are violating my privacy just as much as the guy who calls me in the middle of dinner.
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.
I got sick and tired of having to explain that I was a survey, not a telemarketer, I would not attempt to sell them anything, I would not use personally identifiable information about them for anything, their data was only to be looked at in large clumps, and I would not have phone sex with them!
As the person who got screamed at and otherwise abused, I would like nothing better than to NOT call people who are going to do that. It wastes their time, and wastes my time, and damages my hearing.
If you sign up for a Do Not Call List and fail to read the documentation closely, you may be under the impression that all mass calls to you are illegal, and no amount of explaination by the front-line flunky, or their manager, or the person at the company's 800 number, is going to convince this person differently, because, dammit, they have the Law on Their Side, and that was Illegal and Immoral and They Oughtta Pay For This... and they wind up wasting more of their time on righteous indignation caused by them not properly understanding the terms of the list than they would by quietly saying, "Put me on your do-not-call list" and hanging up.
I would far rather lose some accuracy in the survey, not call these people, and not waste everyone's time. If you don't want some phone company to call you to ask you if you want their service, you will NOT want the hired representative of that phone company to call you to ask you what you think of that service, another nationally known service, and the third service that you actually use for forty minutes.
I do think that certain surveys, such as the youth antismoking survey I had the pleasure of administering, should be exempt from Do Not Call lists, as those will actually be used to figure out ways that kids can be convinced that not only is smoking bad for their health, they should not try it (at least until they are of legal age).
(Amusingly, one man who happened to be employed by the cigarette company who was in fact sponsoring the study politely refused to have his kids take the survey, as he was afraid it would give him a bad rep with them for working for a cigarette company.)
However, surveys that don't have a purpose as noble as that one, such as a survey on burger preferences, should not be exempted from the national Do Not Call 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.
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).
If I get ONE MORE CALL about people asking me about George Wendt, eating beans, and movies, I'm gonna scream!
This sig no verb.
They are men of power. They hump their beautiful but otherwise useless secretaries.
If you and I ever got that powerful, we would have no need for watching sexual variety.