Slashdot Mirror
Telemarketers Sue Over "Do Not Call" List
Joey Patterson writes "CNN reports that 'Telemarketers expanded their legal challenge to the government's do-not-call list, suing a second federal agency over the call-blocking service for consumers that the industry says will devastate business and cost as many as two million jobs.'"
I'm sure alot of people who work for telemarketers have their names on the list just so they don't get calls.
Gibble: Descriptive of an emotional state in which one's mind is scrabbling for some purchase on reality
...then later, then. Seriously, it should have been tackled long ago. What I'd like the government to do is say "OK, we'll compensate for those being laid off, but the list is staying." THEN we'll see the true side of the telemarketters.
FYI - if you work in email spam, better start looking for a job now while you have a chance...
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
I have heard that, in the day of door-to-door salesmen, many such folk were actually thrilled to see "No Solicitors" signs, because they felt that such signs were indicators that the people there knew they couldn't stand up to a sales pitch. I'll bet the same logic might be applied here, so those of us who prefer not to be called might in fact have inadvertently invited twice as many.
What I don't understand is why the list officially does not apply to cell phones? I get sales calls on my cell phone, and it pisses me off. I pay for those minutes on incoming calls!
The CB App. What's your 20?
The sad part about that two million jobs thing is that it's the entire legal basis of the suit. This is one in a string of lawsuits that are straying further from what's legal. Instead companies or class action groups just whine that they think something isn't fair. What's worse is that sometimes the courts go for it. If we keep going in this direction, there won't be laws or a constitution any longer. There will just be a judge who listens to two parties whine, until he proclaims the loudest one the winner.
I would like to see some legal basis behind this challenge. What rights does it infringe? Where does it protect these rights in the constitution? Remember that stuff? That's what court cases used to be about.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
I can't believe how much the media and the courts let slip by. The CNN article should have been titled Telemarketers Attempt to Defraud Courts with fake job loss numbers and scare tactics.
I don't have a clue how many people the Tele-hacks employ, but I sure know that they never get any business from me. By using this list, I am saving them time - increasing their profits!
2 Million Jobs! You have to be kidding me!
Why can't the media see thru lies like this one, and the RIAA, and simply report that companies are lying in order to survive.
A loss of two million jobs...of which a large number are convicts, currently serving prison sentences, who get paid below minimum wage, because it's a good source of cheap labor with American accents, and it's their only opportunity for work. See, e.g., http://www.stopjunkcalls.com/convict.htm
* mild mannered physics grad student by day *
* daring code hacker by night *
http://www.silent-tristero.com
This isn't about the government killing off an industry. It's about protecting the people who are "bothered" enough to request not to be bothered. If I called you every night at dinner time, and if you did not welcome my call, you would ask me to stop. If I did not stop, then by definition, I would be harassing you, and you would have some right to protection by the law.
The DNC list does not prohibit phone solicitations; it merely requires that solicitors prune their lists based on people's requests not to be contacted that way.
Most people in that line of work are paid by commission anyway, so I feel that I'm doing them a favor by having them not call me because I *NEVER* buy anything sold by an anonymous phone (or door) solicitor. Rather than sue, these folks should embrace the change for the better of all mankind!
The CB App. What's your 20?
This from a group that represents an industry that once called me at home no less than 60 times in a five day period!
no it doesn't.
Telemarkets don't show up as "ATTENTION, TELEMARKETER" or "TELEMARKETING INC." or some other dead give away.
Frequently they show up as UNAVAILABLE just like 90% of valid businesses. My mother works for a small Funeral Home. They don't show up as "JOE'S FUNERAL HOME" they show up "UNAVAILABLE".
Should I ignore valid business to block telemarketers? No.
If anything, force Telemarketers to show their ID to the box and pay for me having to use it to block them.
"This truly is a case of regulatory overkill," said Tim Searcy, ATA executive director.
"This [telemarketing] truly is a case of pushy sales overkill" said mobileskimo, Annoyed phone owner.
The telemarketing industry estimates the do-not-call list could cut its business in half, costing it up to $50 billion in sales each year.
Go make money providing society with something usefull.
Implementing the list could also eliminate up to two million jobs, the ATA said.
Stop getting paid for being a schmuck and go do something usefull.
Quality Service Management
Don't get me started on this one.
And we wonder why our economy sucks when people wake up and smell the garbage they've been tossing around. Well, duh, if we're not producing anything and just making shit up to sell to each other, how do you expect anything of real value to be added to our world?
"Last one in is a rotten goblin!" - Kepp
Whiners. Just like spammers, this is a case of people determined to make a medium not intended for advertising into one. Where does it stop? If they cannot call you, are they going to stand in front of my house and shout?
This is laughable. Like travel/insurance/real estate agents and media distribution, this industry sprang up because of a particular circumstance of the business environment. Now that its changing, all these business are crying foul. Not so. They are slowly being replaced with online/digital mediums for searcing and sorting, micropayments and validation services.
IMO, I hope these services die a painful death and the people involved with them go looking for work elsewhere. Economic disaster, true, but I think it'll be good for our population to be forced into newer concepts rather than propping up the old ones. A certain percentage may even train to be part of the digital industry's workforce. Sadly, some may become spammers (if not already).
We're content overloaded and most of it is junk food. There simply isn't enough quality out there to warrant getting it stuffed in our faces every way possible. Let's have a phone/Voip be for private conversations, not substance-free radio blather.
mug
Sure, its annoying to get the calls, but someone feeds their family that way, is it RIGHT to screw them for a little convenience?
You know what? I've *never* purchased anything from a telemarketer. Ever. I've never even been slightly interested in doing so. If I want a product, I'm going to go and get it, not wait for it to come to me. In spite of the fact that I've never once purchased something from a telemarketer, I'm certain I've spent hours telling them to go away. That's hours of my time spent doing something that serves me no purpose and waste's someone else's time as well. How am I "screwing" them by telling them not to call me? Is it ok for them to inconvenience me to attempt to sell me crap I don't want so they can feed their family?
"Heck, I can't figure out *why* we have to pay extra to have an unlisted number. "
Hmm...I wonder if this puts the phone companies in a position where they are essentially blackmailing domestic abuse survivors by charging a fee to keep them unlisted (and somewhat hidden) from their assailants.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
> Heck, I can't figure out *why* we have to pay extra to have
> an unlisted number.
You do? I don't.
I've got an _unpublished_ number, and the rates are the same as
for a regular number. Of course, I told them flat out I wasn't
connecting a voice phone to the line, just a modem. (This is
true. I've connected a voice phone a couple of times to test
new jacks for dialtone, but that's it.) I don't know whether
that has any impact on the rate, but I don't see why it would.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Did I mention Drexel's mascot is "the Shaft?"
One night I did cold calling of Alumni. I called 100 names on the list, I had 1 donation. Most of the alumni I called were downright hostile. Many were unemployed. A good chunk were bitter that they hadn't even paid off their loans and they were already hit up for donations. (Ten years later, but who's counting?)
I felt so dirty that I swore I'd never do it again.
That said, I did help out our local PBS station during a call drive. At least there, people were calling US, with credit card in hand, after having already recieved the "product" so to speak.
The first rule of marketing is to have a product that will sell itself. Ideally you are only introducing the buyer to the seller.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
The TCPA (Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991) (47 USC 227 and subsequent FCC regulations of CFR 64.1200) have outlawed several practices and create certain requirements for others.
Two things completely outlawed:
1) Junk faxes - unsolicited commercial faxes may NOT be sent without WRITTEN authorization of the fax machine/line owner. Period. There is NO EBR (established business relationship) that would exempt that. If you are sent an advertisement and did not specifically give your (express) permission, then it is illegal. Period. Do not allow yourself to be taken in by the BS of 'removal' numbers that are on the faxes. It is merely an attempt to legitimize the industry as much as spammers try to suggest remove address make them ethical.
2) Prerecorded commercial solicitations to your home may NOt be initiated without the EXPRESS permission of the owner. An exemption (unlike junk faxes) would be an EBR. Calls made for survey, political speech, or non commercial are exempt.
If you receive either of the above offenses, then you are immediately owed $500 per VIOLATION by the person initiating the call and on who's behalf the call is made.
That law provides a private right of action. Meaning you are specifically given the authority to sue them in court. While you cannot sue someone that litters on the highway, Congress provided this right. this pretty much makes you a private attorney general of your domain in regards to telemarketing.
Live calls are regulated. They must identify themselves by the caller's name, entity placing the call, and an address or phone number by which they may be contacted. This MUST be provided without your even asking. The company MUST have a DNC (do not call) policy in place before making such calls. They MUST provide you with a written copy of that DNC policy upon request. NEVER, ever allow the telemarketer say they will take your name off 'the list'. Specifically DEMAND that they ADD your name to their company's Do-Not-Call list (emphasis added).
The telemarketing is claiming the loss of millions of jobs. Yet they have not specified in what country. Do many of you not realize how many outbound call centers are in countries like India? The law by not affect that out-of-country company directly in terms of jurisdiction, but it does put liability on companies on who's behalf the call is placed. The only way a company can get by completely is if they are based and operate outside the country and have no business presence in any area under the jurisdiction of the US.
I have gone to court several times against telemarketers. If people knew their rights and enforced them by bringing suit in court as Congress intended, then a national list would not be necessary. the companies would simply not be able to operate.
Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
Exactly. They're never hawking anything I want anyway -- in fact, the interest level is about as high as for the average spam.
But "2 million jobs"?? Are they counting not only the boilerroom flunkies and their managers, but also everyone in every industry that ever used telemarketing? Even it that's so, I suspect this number was pulled out of their ass.
And most of said flunkies aren't making a living wage anyway. Back about 1985, I attended a "job fair" that proved to be a boilerroom recruiter. Now, they claimed that it was possible to make serious bucks. Well, I happened to be sitting where I could see onto the manager's desk, and the previous week's wage sheet just happened to be laying open where I could read it. ONE person had made the promised several hundred bucks. ONE other person had made about $100. But everyone else had made only $40 -- for the entire week.
Now, do we really WANT to preserve an industry that pays that poorly, even compared to India??
Come to think of it, if cheap internet-based long distance becomes an everyday reality, the next step is to outsource boilerroom telemarketing to India. And then how do you go about enforcing a Do Not Call list??
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?