Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Court Blocks Anti-Telemarketing List
DirkDaring writes "Yahoo is reporting that a U.S. court in Oklahoma has blocked the national 'do not call' list that would allow consumers to stop most unwanted telephone sales calls. With around 50 million phone numbers currently signed up this could get very messy."
Just when you thought it was safe to answer the phone...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
No matter if you agree or not, you must realize that this judge just ticked off roughly 50 million Americans. He must really, REALLY think he's making the right decision (or lives in his own little world...).
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
The question seems to be whether U.S. congress gave the FTC the authority to create such a list. This is a popular measure with a lot of support. Would it be possible for congress to explicitly give the FTC this authority?
We're hosed.
I can see the fnords!
everyone start calling 405-609-5099
So do the Telemarketers now have a list of phone numbers that they know are valid? Can they use the DNC list to target their marketing for "difficult" or "hostile" numbers? Was this really just a scam all along?
Or is their access to the DNC list numbers restricted?
From CNN
------
Objects in Mirror are Losing!
I have an unlisted number, which works very well thank you. If I had signed up, I would now be fair game for all those tele-marketers based in Oklahoma.
Call the judge to tell him how you feel, or just try to convince him to change his carrier.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
Or has an enormously inflated sense of self-importance and likes that sort of thing.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
One important help in countering this threat, is by making it widely know which politicians, judges and other electable officials are opposing this do not call list.
This is an excellent way to use votes to pressure these people, without waiting for the next election. Let them know this influences your votes
the pun is mightier than the sword
Name of the judge?
Addresses of the judge... Home, Courthouse?
Phone numbers for the judge? Home, Courthouse, Cell?
Docket # of the case...
I want to file an Amicus brief, and I WANT TO CALL THIS ASSHOLE.
After about 50 million people give him a call, he might get the message that we've told the industry to go fuck themselves for a reason...
My anger notwithstanding, there is US Sup. Ct. precedence for upholding the list! The Supremes decided this regarding regular mail, and I fail to see why telephone calls ought to be any different...
Most of the telemarketing firms are in these backwater states. I'll bet he was getting pressured by local businesses to strike it down.
Ruling for business over private citizens. Now that's something that takes real guts in the US.
You'd think that with THAT many people signed up, the courts would realize that this is what the people want and decide accordingly, especially when the lawmakers themselves are saying that they approved it.
Of course, the people don't have millions of dollars like the telemarketing lobbyists do...
-- Dr. Eldarion --
http://www.the-dma.org/, they seem to be quite proud of themselves
Yup, Big Business does indeed have more lawyers than you and me. This was to be expected.
Yesterday, I got wiped on the floor for suggesting that this will happen to the new Anti-Spam law in Cali.
Well, froth at the mouth all you want, it *will* come to pass.
Yet again big business and lobbying wins. Time to start a new country.
I'm wondering if this judge is getting some sort of deal with a ton of telemarketer companies. "You cancel this 'Do Not Call List' and we'll take your number off of our lists."
So now the bozos are about to have access to 50-million recently *verified* phone numbers that were provided by the do-not-call list so that those clowns wouldn't call?
Yippie. >:|
The article claims that the arguement was that a national do-not-call list violates free speech. How can a list which is opt-in violate free speech? These telemarketers are perfectly free to say whatever they like - I just dont them to call my house to say it.
.
This will get done. The court just has a problem with how the FTC did it. I bet if Congress passed a do not call list bill there would be no problem.
This is ridiculous. It's my understanding that signing up for the national do not call list was about a person's right to privacy. Free speech laws do not protect someone in the case of harassment or stalking. The do not call list seems kind of like getting a restraining order on them. I hope this decision gets overturned quickly.
I mean, if SPAM is okay in your email, then why not through your telephone? How else do you expect to be bombarded with senseless crap you don't want?
Oh wait - spam ISN'T okay in my email...scratch that...
William
When you're not looking, this sig is in Latin.
Of course telemarketers heard the toll of their death knell, challenges like this are to be expected. The same will happen if and when any spam legislation gets enacted nationwide as well.
because what hunting rifle has a bayonet lug
bomb?? ahah you're so 90's!
nowadays we use planes!
Write your congress person. Congress just needs to grant the FTC that power. Then the FTC won't be "overstepping their bounds!"
Doh!
I was beginning to think people would actually get what they want in America. My faith in the system is restored!
Everyone stop right now, and CALL the Oklahoma Judicial branch, and tell them ALL about unsolicited phone calls, and how much you just LOVE to get them.
Maybe after a few hours.... They might understand how we feel.
www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
"...Looky hare - a foan cawl fer me!"
It looks like those judge(s) are going to get an angry phone call... or two... or 50 million.
Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
From the article, "Lawmakers were quick to criticize the court's decision, arguing that they had given the FTC the authority to implement the list." But did they give the FTC the authority to break freedom of speech laws? What gives politicians and charities the right to bother us after hours but not businesses?
I'm sure they'll appeal quickly and it could well pass as is but lawmakers make the laws and judges interpret them. If they decide that the law is bad, they'll do what is necessary in their ruling.
$#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
How would this ruling relate to a similar anti-spam law if it were created?
Free speech is one thing, but if I'm paying for bandwidth, wouldn't that be another thing?
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Presumably a single state ruling against this makes the entire DNC list unenforcable. "Oh, hi, we're just calling to check whether you're in Oklahoma or not. Hey, since you're on the line, can we explain why you want a new kitchen?"
How well democracy works.
And can then be sabotaged by one or two well-placed bribes. Oh, sorry, was I speaking out loud?
The DNC list is a triumph of Internet activism, and a courtroom should not be allowed to overrule one's right to a peaceful evening at home.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
This is just unbelievable!
How could the US District court rule that the FTC doesn't have the authority to "implement and enforce" the do-not-call list when they were tasked to do this by Congress?
I wonder who was the judge.
Too bad we can't vote for district justices.
www.christopherlewis.com
from Fox News...
And start marketing to him..
Lots of these federal judges are SO removed from reality, they wouldn't know it if hit over the head with a clue by four.
Corporatism != Free Market
A nice quote from that article:
Gee, I guess that never occurred to them before this list was created. Now that it has occurred to them, any bets on if they'll actually respect those wishes?Lawmakers give the FTC the jurisdiction to do this. FTC does it. Law enforcers/interperters say the FTC "overstepped its authority". Now...I know the US system allows judges to question laws and their legality wrt citizen's rights...but to say they didn't have the authority seems incorrect. What am I missing?
This judge needs to be impeached, pilloried, tarred/feathered, and called at all hours on his telephone.
I'm sorry, but I will not take any two-bit, inbred, tobacco-chewin' good ol' boy from OKC telling me that MY private phones, which I pay for and maintain, are an acceptable conduit for commercial activity that I neither invite nor condone.
Lee West, with all due respect (none), kiss my fucking rectum.
In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
You have to wonder what congressperson or senator is living in this judge's hot little pocket?.
It's astounding what they put up with if they think there is a sale at the end. then I tell them I live in a grass hutt.
Sorry, I cannot use your card, I am full of fruit and cheese!
First, does it effectly halt the do-not-call list's use for the other 49 states? It would be a shame if a state with a population of just 3.5 million could cause the scrapping of a list that protects 50 million Americans from unwanted calls.
The other question left unanswered is where this ruling will be appealed. Does it go to a higher Oklahoma court, or to the Supreme Court, or what?
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
I would like to discuss this with the judge. What is the judge's name and telephone number?
Have any of you guys been able to find the decision? Because I haven't.
I love how a judge can spend hours or days poring over law and evidence, in addition to a lifetime of legal study and service, only to have people read two sentences in a Yahoo news article and declare him wrong without a doubt.
Judge Lee R. West
http://www.okwd.uscourts.gov/west.htm
You know what to do.
Would this let spammers call from Oklahoma to everyone else now, or are we still protected in our non-crazy states?
Firt as a person who does some biz over the phone( we call people who send us requests to call them) I can tell you that this current law SUCKS. It makes a bunch of costly paperwork and stuff for us. Plus I have had to talk to lawyers from the FTC AND the FCC and nobody can tell me exactly what I have to do to comply. Secondly the law is a violation of teh 1st amendment. The surpeme court ruled on a colorado state law that prevented door to door canvassing. The law was almost exactly the same and the court said it violated the 1st amendment. If you do not like it, we can change the 1st amendment to exempt phone sales from protection, but to do that we have to change the 1st amendment. Free speech comes with costs. Hearing people say things you do not like or do not want to hear is one of those costs.
The only way to bust a doper--is when you yourself become a smoker!
Oklahoma as well as Omaha.
In my experience, the Midwest is FULL of semi-sleezy businesses like giant telemarketing call centers, credit card processing centers, et cetera. There were TONS of them in Omaha, and I'd imagine there'd be lots in Oklahoma as well due to similar economic/financial settings (cheap real estate, lots of room, lots of local bumpkins for cheap labor).
This probably has something to do with it. That, and this is a state where perhaps 50% of the people believe that the Bible is not only true, but literally true and unerring. Their views on things are a little bit different from most of the rest of the nation.
Or, to put it another way, a state (Oklahoma) where pretty much every other person believes the Bible is 100% literal is just the kind of state that would think an anti-telemarketing law is a bad thing.
Hopefully, other states will squash this decision... or, better yet, the Supremes will step in and give a Grand Holy Smackdown to this silliness.
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
This only blocks part of the big changes that are comming down on Oct. 1st. There are still pending changes in the way that telemarketers must handle abandon calls, etc. The FTP and FCC were working together here for something. Still stands to be seen what is going to happen for the other changes.
Obviously looking out for the best interests of the people. As of April 1, 2001 there were 3,450,654 Oklahomaidians. So assuming each person has one phoneline, the people have voted by a whopping 1449% that they want the list.
(yes, I know that the math is off, national list and all)
That's the exact same story. It came through Reuters.
To understand recursion,
you must first understand recursion.
Well at least we didn't all just give our numbers to the telemarketers...
Just because you signed up for the KOTOR list doesn't mean you won't receive phone calls, as the main character is really darth revan.
just goes to show you that you can't trust anyone except the guy who wrote LaTeX.
Are you MORE than your SPINAL COLUMN?
Two of the top businesses in the state are telemarketers:
f
http://www.state.ok.us/osfdocs/budget/table1.pd
At least Walmart has more employees.
In the CNN article I read they said they were fighting it based on first amendment. The right to free speech doesn't guarantee you an audience.
Your rights end when they start intruding on other people's rights.
Don't I have to right to block people from calling me if I don't want them to?
What the judge said is that the FTC didn't have the right to go creating a list that people can't call, because Congress didn't tell them they could. It's not that he disagrees with the list at all. He just wants it done with the right authority. THEN of course we'll see what the courts think of the list itself.
Seriously. Congress is probably going to pass a bill, very quickly, that gives the FTC this authority, considering that 50 million numbers have been signed up for it - and that no congressman has spoken out saying how horrible the idea is.
This is a setback, not game-over. It's like throwing out a court case for being submitted in the wrong jurisdiction.
I work for a list marketing company and as such I get a unique perspective on this issue. Much as I'd hate to admit it this really is a good thing. My company has been growing and expanding but this law was going to seriously hurt our business. We market real lists, not spam crap lists and as a result it was going to cost us a ton of money to clean our lists to ensure DNC compliance. In addition our business was about to take a serious drop as a result of this legislation. Combine the 2 and what you have is increased cost with decreased business. Not a good thing for job security.
We are a small firm, only 12 employees. Imagine the damage that this would have done across the industry. Many people (read programmers) were about to lose their jobs and with the current state of the US economy that sucks.
That being said, its all just a matter of perspective. When I go home and my phone rings during dinner I want to throw it across the room. As a matter of fact, despite the company I work for I was one of the first to put my name on the DNC list.
no easy answers...
While the article provides little to no other real information besides "hey, OK shot down something that people at the Federal level brought into existence, the call-spammers are happy, everybody else isn't", what I'm really interested in is the effect this has on me, a non-OK resident. If, as the parent says, it makes everyone on the DNC list legally available to OK-based call-spammers again (provided the OK courts get away with this), then that sucks. If, on the other hand, it opens up the OK numbers on the DNC list to any call-spammer from anywhere in the country, then it sucks to be them and I'm glad I don't live there.
If it works both ways, well...who's up for a real live torch-and-pitchfork vigilante party? Friggin' state courts, anyway.
"Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
I disagree. This just shows that this is a very popular program. If the FTC did "overstep its bounds", then I'm sure congress can be convinced to change the FTC's 'bounds.' Better to have a Congressional stamp of approval on it anyway. I get worried when federal agencies start taking too much on themselves.
Once again, we have a case where the court system is overstepping its bounds - without any precedent or constitutional reference, a court decides that a law is invalid. When our checks & balances are messed up, how do we fix them? Why are we allowing our courts to destroy the rule of law? To see some more examples of this happening, check out this article by Orson Scott Card. It is one of many, and brings up some good, and scary, points.
Ok at 50 million numbers and climing. Its easy to see the US people do not like telemarketing. but seams the US legal system can not take this inot account. I would hope this goes to a higher cort,a nd all 50million people are asked to write in saying why they do not like telemarketing.
Also give out the phone numbers for the judge's house. And you can all call him around dinner time.
The court said the FTC didn't have the power to make this law and had overstepped its bounds...
Excuse me, but not only did Congress approve this, but 50 million Americans did, too. If 50 million Americans say a law should go through, then I'm thinking that it should go through. If 100 telemarketing companies (and their 2 paltry million employees) say it shouldn't, well, majority rules in a democracy. 25 to 1, we win.
There are still plenty of appeals to come... this is a district court, so it can still go up to the Supreme Court if it has to. Even if the FTC can't get it done, there is more than enough support in Congress to pass their own law or do whatever they can do about it.
IANAL, but I play one on
I went here to the FTC site on rulemaking re: telemarketing calls, and it looks to my eye like this is authorized by existing legislation. Also, I read this on the Telemarketing Sales Rule (Amended) and how it derives from Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
I guess this is just a case of the court being overly cautious here, but I fail to see how this is a restraint on Free Speech, since (a) the speech we are talking about here falls into the "commercial" category (b) it is "speech" directed into people's private homes without their authorization, permission or any expectation that they want to be bothered with it. Free Speech doesn't mean the freedom to yell your speech into my ear whenever you feel like it.
Maybe we should call the judge, or the telemarketers at 5~7PM to tell them what we think of all this. While they eat their Dinner. ~The Doc.
Just remember to make sure you excersise your free speech rights to the max and call up as many telemarketing centers as you can, we could set up an online data base of numbers that are known to be of telemarketing companies and their employees homes, what are we selling?: The message that we dont want to be called, call them up and tell them you dont want to be called, call them up again five mins later and tell them again that you dont want to be called, if its a telemarketing company thats never bothered you in your life even better, tell them you dont want to be called. If enough people DOS the telemarketers they will be screwed, or at the very least get pissed off.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
If the do-not-call list gets blocked in Oklahoma, will the list be blocked all over the United States or just in Oklahoma? Will telemarketers in Oklahoma be allowed to bother me in New York? Will telemarketers in New York be able to call people in Oklahoma?
- "Nobody came out that night, not one was ever seen. But Old Man Stauf is waiting there, crazy sick and mean!"
"Where the phone rings freely while you dine..."
"Where your privacy's cheap, and things that beep
"Don't stop slammers - even on their dime...."
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
one of the articles i've read on this said that the judge said the FTC overstepped it's authority. Several members of congress responded with something like "No, we gave them that authority when we drafted and enacted laws permitting the creation of the DNC"
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Hold on, hear me out.
If the Do-Not Call list goes into effect, then that will essentially be the Last Word on the subject. By putting yourself on it, you are declaring to the world you have no interest in Telemarketers. And, reversely, if you do NOT sign up, you are implicitly inviting them.
Now then, two points:
Number one, running a call center takes a LOT of money. The job is so odious that you can't pay minimum wage, you have to pay well above the standard wage for what is, otherwise, not a terribly difficult job. Plus overhead, huge phone bills, etc.
EVERY BAD NUMBER wastes money. A lot. We've seen those things about how you can screw TMs over by leaving the phone off the hook, etc. So, first of all, this would be a boon for the industry since it would weed out everyone they know would never, ever buy something over the phone. Far less wasted money in calling "Not Interesteds."
And, number two. Going with what I wrote at the top, you assume that any number NOT on the list is up for grabs. You then hire some market consultants and make God's own targetted marketing base. Every citizen not on that list, you start running background checks, sales figures, anything you can get at publically, and start fine-tuning your pitch to target those people specifically instead of taking the shotgun approach.
It would take a little setting up, but the end result would be a huge leap in actual sales, and less money wasted in worthless calls.
So, all this really just gives me even LESS pity for the DMA than I previously didn't have. Just like the RIAA, they're attempting to use the government and the court system to block a "scary" change to their business model, which would actually be a boon if they'd just open their eyes.
Such businesses do not deserve to exist.
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
Without the authority to prevent telemarketers from calling numbers on the list, does the list become a telemarketer's call list (since they have apparently had access to it for some time)?
"The Direct Marketing Association and its fellow plaintiffs are grateful that the federal District Court in Oklahoma City understood and upheld the industry's belief that the Federal Trade Commission does not have authority to implement and enforce a national do-not-call list," the trade group said in a press release."
The article is erroneously missing the statement:
"Our check is in the mail, as promised."
I haven't had time to read it yet, but here it is: Order
--Kobayashi--
So basically the do not call list was actually just a major data collection effort put on by the government. Yes please fill out the form so you won't get called, psyche. The list will also probably be sold to help pay down the deficit:)
You know, when the narrow interests of a handful of non-citizens trump the interests of the people that say they don't want to be bothered by said non-citizens, we're really just a few steps from Fascism.
I think that the backlash from this stunt is going to be -impressive-. I'm already working on ways to make sure that telemarketers lose money in this deal, including taking the time out to do as much as I can to keep them on the phone, so it drives down their numbers.
In space, no one can hear you moo.
Oh, I should point out their phone numbers: President's Office -- 212.768.7277, ext. 1604 Privacy -- 212.768.7277, ext. 2408
A post on Techdirt has contact information for DMA (Direct Marketing Association).
This may be delayed, but it will happen. Assuming that it is really 50 million people, and not 50 million numbers (big difference, I myself registered 3 numbers), Washington politicians can not ignore that large of a group. 1/6 of the US population is large enough to push through legislation no matter now much money the DMA puts toward lobbying.
Children in the backseats don't cause accidents. Accidents in the back seats cause children.
405-609-5140
I spoke to a nice lady, told her the gist of my second paragraph above (redacting the personal comments) and that the judge had overstepped HIS authority. I warned her to expect a lot of calls.
She asked me for my name and phone number....
In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
Public welfare is, if at all, last on their to-do list.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Why don't you take a minute and call the Judge's office and personally thank him for ruining your dinners for a long time.
So what one branch of the government giveth, another takes away. Unfortunately, there are checks and balances to keep any one part of the US government from harming corporations.
Even though the law itself would not have affected my life much -- 90% of my telemarketing calls are autodialed recordings, which are illegal already -- this is saddening. The Do-Not-Call List was the first good thing I remember the US government doing in my life.
Halliburton will be allowed to bid on maintaining the 50 million subsciber list.
How sleepless is the egg, knowing that which throws the stone forsees the bone.
Who would have though...the day I'm running a load test on our company's new No Call List application, we get this. Oklahoma, quit being a brat. The IT spending to meet this no call list should be a hell of a lot more economically stimulating than any telemarketing would ever be.
First off, here's hoping that the decision is reversed, but if it's not, how about the following?
Make it illegal for businesses to block their identities over the phone. This way, I can effectively use the existing laws (consumer telecommuications protection act) to accomplish the same thing. As it stands now, they may be legally required to identify themselved to me upon request, but, if they just hang up when I ask, what can I do?
A goal is a dream with a deadline
fuck you troll, i upgraded to a macintosh and now i use web objects
/dev/modem
SLASHDOT OWNERS AND MODERATORS, please make this webpage viewable in LaTeX because i accidentaully soft linked lynx to
Are you MORE than your SPINAL COLUMN?
Let me guess, this "do not call" list infringes on the tele-marketing companies right to ring you up at 1am to tell you about their great money saving offers?
I think that this is something that should go to vote. I mean 50 million votes to get rid of telemarketing is a lot. If the American public would turn out to vote like they did to stop telemarketers I think the governmental landscape would look very different in America. But never the less isn't this the voice of the people just the same? Shouldn't government officials take notice of such a turnout? If this was a list for not getting unsolicited email the turnout may have even been bigger.
Even if the do-not-call list is reinstated, it people will still get called. I've already gotten calls from "non-profit" organizations offering free advice for debt relief (of course that advice will be to talk to some for-profit org).
It's too easy for the spammers/telemarketers to find ways around this kind of legislation. All we can hope is that it will occur to someone that if a person went to the effor to join the do-not-call list, then it would be a waste of time for a telemarketer to call them.
Maybe it'll mean more after another cup o' coffee.
Let 'em waste resources on people who HATE them. That means they waste money, and go out of business. I just hope someone sells a way to track people calling you, so you can do... nasty things.
The article claims no such thing. It says the DMA and other plaintiffs argued that the FTC does not have the authority to implement and enforce such a list. But thanks for digging deep for this insightful nugget anyhow, it has really opened my eyes. Or something.
the first amendment does not apply here. they're bothering people in their homes, and outsiders do not have the right to say whatever they want in an individual's home. the individual has the authority to control what comes into their home...blah blah blah, in other words, telemarketers have no first amendment rights in a private home. i cite the banning of pornographic junk mail, the "do not mail" lists, etc.
Freedom of speech does not mean you can say whatever you want to whoever you want whenever you want, and I'm sick of people who should know better interpreting it that way. Freedom of speech is about not being persecuted for what you say, it's not about being allowed to call my house and harrass me about some product you are trying to sell, after I clearly stated that I didn't want the call.
Can be sent to The Honorable Lee R. West Flowers are discouraged, as the delivery people get a hassle in security. The judge was appointed by President Carter to the bench, but Nixon also put him to work in D.C. The Judge's bio can be found here
The judge isn't saying that do-not-call list itself is illegal, just that the FTC doesn't have the power to create such a list. Sure it's a technicality, but someone's got to keep these Federal agencies from overstepping their bounds.
Since this is a politically popular item, I'm sure Congress will fix the problems with the legislation, and the do-not-call list will see the light of day, maybe after a delay, or if the judge did make the wrong decision (he may have, I don't know much about the FTC) it could be overturned by a higher court.
By reading this sig, you agree to the terms of my sig license.
If 50 million Americans voluntarily signed up for this list, isn't that the same thing as 50 million Americans saying "I don't want telemarketers calling me" and likewise 50 million "votes" for a no-call list? The judge must have an issue with *implementation* because it's painfully obvious that there is overwhelming support for this. Even if there are implementation issues, with 50 million supporters, one must wonder if the lobbyists got a hold of him and clouded his judgement with small green pieces of paper.
StyleChief
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! -M. Python
Except the Supreme Court has already held that commercial speech doesn't have the same protection as individual speech. The question is probably going to end back up in the Supreme Court as it's not clear how much latitiude Congress has in a case like this.
As annoying as telemarketing calls are, they do serve a function. Just because 50 million people believe that they shouldn't have to be bothered saying "I'm not interested." doesn't necessarily mean Congress can shut the industry down. Clearly, somebody is interested otherwise the calls wouldn't keep coming.
You mean This Lee R. West?
Only lives about 15 miles from the courthouse.
Of course Mapquest could be wrong...
Anyone feel like giving it a try?
That article is awful. Are there any details on what the court said and what its reasons were? Is this a final ruling? Court's don't just say, "I hereby block this, let's all go home." Was it a first amendment thing or a technicality, or what?
Sign up for a free Adobe Acrobat PrintMe Internet Printing Account and fax away!
Does anybody happen to have the judge's home phone number? See, I have this vinyl siding....
Free speech only applies until you are causing other people trouble..
If I dont like what's on the radio I can change stations or turn it off.
This is MY way of turning off the telemarketers and scammers calling my phone. If anyone's rights are being violated it's the consumers.
Just becuase I have a phone # does not mean they can call me.. it's the same reason I have a no soliciting sign on my door.
In no way is the FCC over stepping it's authority on this issue. Clearly telephone communications fall under the FCC and this is a voluntary program. I can see how people have to right to free speech in a public forum, my home is no such forum.
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
Okay, so what I want to know is, what's this number? I called it, and it's a fax machine. Should we be sending them lots of faxes telling them that killing this is a bad idea?
Three calls to the presidents office stating that if they have the right to call me, I have the right to call THEM. If each of the 50 million called them 1/day, do you think they will get the message
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
Headquarters
1120 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6700
Telephone: 212.768.7277
Fax: 212.302.6714
1111 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-3603
Telephone: 202.955.5030
Fax: 202.955.0085
Contact List by Subject
Accounts Payable webmaster@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1353
Advertising - Print webmaster@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1423
Advertising - Web Site kebeling@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1554
Awards - ECHO echo@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1397
Benefits Program dcoyne@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1355
DMA Store - Books & More lrc@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1930
Chapters chapters@the-dma.org 212.768.7277
Conference Registration customerservice@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1500
Conference Programming conference@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1513
Conference Exhibitors conference@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 2469
Conference Speakers conference@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1528
Consumer Assistance consumer@the-dma.org 212.790.1488
Councils councils@the-dma.org 212.768.7277
Council Membership councils@the-dma.org 212.768.7277
Council Events councils@the-dma.org 212.768.7277
Direct Marketing Educational Foundation The DMA Government Affairs Online Member Outreach Program Governme@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 2405
Government Affairs Governme@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 2405
Human Resources
hr@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1338
International Services Internat@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1786
I've had an influx in the last few weeks of calls and finally lost my temper on the phone. I started jeering the telemarketers that they had till the first before they get fined. i really wouldn't want to disappoint them.
I had a great sig.. then I lost my penmanship.
Damn, this has been a depressing week. Verisign's blatant abuse. Approval of EU software patents. Anti-spammers forced to give up. And now court blockage of the DNC list.
These are sad, sad days.
Pick you personal favorite area code
You can't destroy the Earth, that's where I keep all my stuff!
Getting a national do-not-call list was exactly what the TMs wanted. That way they could challenge it in federal court. If they didn't they'd have to challenge it in each state. It was dumb anyway. They need a 'do-call' list not a 'do-not-call'.
IANAL (but should have been)
From what little I saw of the ruling, the key to the case is not free speech, but rather which federal agency is handling this. Commerce assigned it to the FTC as a trade regulatory issue, but the district court judge obviously saw it as a telecommunications issue, and therefore under control of the FCC.
In essence, the list is legal, it's who has enforcement power that is in question.
----------
Something cleverI've signed up for the DMA do not call list, and it seems to be working. I've only had my phone number for a year, though, so I got very few calls even before I signed up. Now I get none, except from the local paper.
Telemarketers are not allowed to call cellular phones.
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
The problem with this assumption is that Congress created the FCC and the FTC. Congress defines the roles of these organizations. Congress picked the FTC to create the Do Not Call List. So I don't understand your assertion that the FCC should have done it. The Justice system has no Constitutional right to overrule the Congress on which agency should perform a function.
I never signed up because I'm on Missouri's do not call list and I didn't see the advantages of the national one as long as the state one existed.
In fact, I saw it as an opportunity for out of state charities to get my number. "No I don't want to sponsor the Rhode Island state troopers, now leave me alone!"
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
What does this reek of?
Exactly, this will be sorted out by the end of the week. Oct 1st is just around the corner.
No more Micro$oft bashing from me. Its like bashing at the special olympics.
Let's imagine a world where the courts throw out the FTC do not call list based on the idea that the FTC has overstepped it's authority.
In such a world there are 50 million plus voters who all support an issue during a time of a very divided government. It's a legislator's wet dream. An easy issue with bi-partisan approval that constituents love. Just the thing to go into re-election trumpeting. Oh and cheap too. When congress gets done with it the DMA may be facing all kinds of restrictions beyond a simple do not call list.
We can deal with telemarketers ourselves. steps to follow:
1. Be very kind to them, waste their time (after all, aren't they paid ocmission?)
2. get his name, supervisor's name and phone number.
4. Ask them silly questions such as:
-Sorry sir. I can't hear you too well. Are you calling from a cell phone? NO! YOU on a cell phone. this is my home phone.
-I'm very intrested in this satellite TV offer. But how many channels of digital porn do I get? -Is the porn child? Its best if it is. I am a cathloic priest after all.
-So I see your name and number int he white pages. I'll call you at 3am to sell you crap. I apologize in advance if I wake your children.
4. after you are finished with the telemarketer, call up the supervisor and complain. Say he was very rude and used words such as (be creative). If he hung up at one of your stupid questions, tell the supervisor that ou were intrested, but he hung up. They should seriously consider his employment with the telemarketer firm, considering he was SOOO rude to you. The firm lost a sale because of him.
and for more info: Telemarketers: How to deal with them.
-Grump
Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
Since when is being "an industry that provides millions of jobs" relevant to the law? Can (drug dealers/prostitutes/sweatshops/pick your favorite bad guy) make the same argument?
Let's slashdot the Direct Marketing Association. Their number is 1-800-969-6566. They PAY when people call their 800 number. Call them. Get ahold of a customer service rep, and ask to talk to their supervisor. Offer to sell them something (a beer can, a lawnmower, the DeCSS code, something). Every minute you talk to them they pay for it.
They've just said that they have the right to call us, so that naturally must mean we can call them, right? With any luck they'll be slashdotted before 3pm.
"Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
That's all I've got to say, since I don't have mod points...
Have EVDO, will travel.
And they really wonder why the Oklahoma courthouse is a terrorist target?
I didn't sign up for this. Now the do not call list will become a call list for telemarketers. At least in Oklahoma. Hopefully this will not happen in other states too.
My subtext is just a figment of your imagination.
Our databases and applications have already been scrubbed against the FTC DNC list here.
Regardless of the court ruling, word has come down from management to continue forward and not rollback the some 26 million households we suppressed.
So I guess not even the direct marketers believe this ruling will stand.
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
Of course you realize that if the national list gets thrown out due to being found unconstitutional, your Missouri list will go away too.
Have a nice day!
---------------------------------------------
SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't see why your industry should be granted special protection or favors. I've had to switch lines of work at least half a dozen times because of shifts in the economic winds. I don't recall ever arguing that the government should go out of its way to protect a livelihood that I had enjoyed but was ditching because it wasn't covering rent and groceries.
It wasn't that long ago that the ownership of human beings was considered a stand-up way of doing business in this country. Get over it, and get a different job.
In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
...and you hit the nail on the head. I have 3 telemarketing companies within 3 miles of my house, lots of call centers to. Ive heard were a major telecom hub due to our location (Tulsa) The sleazy business/litteralist is right on the head. It seems the more they have their head in the bible, the sleazier they are.
The phone number for the district court is 405-609-5000. I think we should all exercise our free-speech rights by calling them and telling them what we think of their decision.
(My compliments to Dave Barry for the inspiration.)
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
I'm pissed, but I want to know what I can do legally to get this overturned. Anybody have any ideas? I'm going to buy stamps right now to write this fool (they don't read email).
1) Why is that unconstitutional?
2) If congress doesn't have that power, who does?
3) If that power is against the FTC mandate, who gave the FTC that mandate in the first place?
Since this isn't a free speech issue (read the decision), SOMEBODY has to have the power to go tell this judge to shove it up his ass, and it's either Congress or Bush - and both would be dogshit dumb not to go along with this theoretical "Do Not Call" bill as elections draw ever closer.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
- "The DMA is a membership organization." Interesting fact.
- "We are here to help you." Good, because I need help right now- my blood pressure is up after reading this article.
- "You can reach us by mail, phone, fax or e-mail at the following addresses:"
And then follows a list of over 30 contacts. I wonder who could help... "Consumer assistance"? No, I never consume their products (although they try to force feed everyone) so that isn't me. Privacy? That probably goes to an overfilled voicemail. How about "Direct Marketing Educational Foundation"? That could work- I certainly think that Direct Marketing needs more education.I don't like the ruling-in fact it's just more of the bureaucratic red tape that everyone in this nation hates. However, it's part of the system that the FTC can't just railroad what it thinks should be law into effect without the other branches' approval.
That said, I'm very unhappy that my two cell phone numbers are on that list right now.
JGG
The people listed on this page should know what you think on the issue. Please call each of them (or at least one of them) and let them know what you think!
(Yes, it's the Federal District Court for Westeern Oklahoma). Robin J Cauthron is the chief judge
The Supreme Court has ruled previously that freedom of speech does not entitle you to force people to listen to your message. This was brought up years ago. Basically the concern is that if you could force people to listen you could interfere with those people trying to peacably assemble, another constitutional right (e.g., disrupt a meeting of political opponents by forcing them to listen to your speech, and thus preventing them from conducting business). Since the Do Not Call list consists of people asserting their right not to listen, I think the telemarketers will have a difficult time winning.
As annoying as telemarketing calls are, they do serve a function.
A corporate function. I'm not interested in corporate functions. If I want to talk to someone, I give them my phone number, and say, "Call me sometime. We'll do lunch."
If this is a question of free speech, then I say we get the numbers of the telemarketers, and start calling them at all hours, just to chat.
It's just free speech, after all.
Just because 50 million people believe that they shouldn't have to be bothered saying "I'm not interested." doesn't necessarily mean Congress can shut the industry down.
It's not Congress, it's the people who opt-out. Congress merely gave people the power to opt-out. How is that unfair to the industry? Hell, the industry should be glad! That's 50 Million phone calls they don't have to make because those people would have said "No" anyway.
Also, corporations do not have any fundamental "right" to exist. Corporations are charters granted by the state. Until the late 1880s in the US, the state could excersize the right to revoke a charter if it were determined that the corporation were not acting in the best interest of the citizenry.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
I don't see what a Disk Operating System has to do with Dynamic Network Connections lists...
The constitution was upheld today. If you allow the government to interrupt free trade because people are a little annoyed... what's next!?!?
As a U.S. citizen you should be DEMANDING that the government not meddle in your business practices.
I thought that a techy crowd like this would be able to smell the problems with government intervention like this.
the people or big business?
i gave them a call... they said that they have their own do-not-call list, so they don't need the ftc having one... ironic eh?
m l
Direct Marketing Association.
www.the-dma.org
Headquarters
1120 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6700
Telephone: 212.768.7277
Fax: 212.302.6714
Washington D. C. Office
1111 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-3603
Telephone: 202.955.5030
Fax: 202.955.0085
and a whole list of crappy people:
http://www.the-dma.org/aboutdma/contactthedma.sht
President's Office
Presiden@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 1604
Press Contact
Privacy
privacy@the-dma.org 212.768.7277, ext. 2408
Runnin' On Empty
I wonder why these scum do not realize that congress/FCC/et al have done them a huge favor.
They have just been supplied a list - free of charge - of fifty million people on whom they should not waste their money contacting.
Friends, I have to admit that during my college days I was one of these bottom-feeders for about three days in the service of a nameless portrait company, you know the one (the things we won't do for beer money), and the biggest problem we faced was the endless string of not-interesteds we had to filter through to get to the one grandma who might take the pitch. In fact, we had a system (way back then we used rotary phones and a green-and-white fanfold printout, so it may be better, I don't know) to remove so-called "hostiles" from our list, a process which took about five minutes EACH number.
These clowns shouldn't be suing in court, they should be bowing down to our collective magnamosity.
"Hello, this is Homer Simpson, AKA Happy Dude. The court has ordered me to call every person in town to apologize for my telemarketing scam. I'm sorry. If you can find it in your heart to forgive me, send one dollar to: Sad Dude, 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield. You have the power."
-B
Your a pessimist, arent you? I give them 20 minutes after this post.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
The court held that the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) lacked a statute giving it the authority to create a national do-not-call list.
The other shoe (and the bigger dog) in this is the FCC... which explicitly *does* have the authority to create a national Do-Not-Call list. See 47 USC 227.
The only problem is that the FCC has exempted telemarketing calls and faxes from radio stations.
I fail to see how the telemarketers lose money by not being able to call people who are not going to buy anything anyway. They're almost as whiny sounding as the RIAA!
Let's set up a National DO call list. Which will post all the home phone number of anyone who against National Do NOT call list.
... like some enlargement equipments. Because this is a distributed effort, no hugh long distance bill to pay.
And people take turn to call these numbers and sell them something
Just record those three tones that indicate a telephone number is unavailable. That is the first thing my answering machine plays when playing "my message" to the caller. If I recall correctly, these tones are what telemarketers "listen" for to determine if a telephon number is valid or not. Of course, all my friends know to leave a message after grandma bell plays the tones and says "tone tone tone, the number you have reached, blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah is no longer in service. Please make a note of it [repeat]".
Works every time!
Maybe he should have tried to get an unlisted home phone number before he wrote this decision.
(I'm just pointing to some publicly-available information. It's your responsibility to be nice.)
You are hypocrites. Plus, it is unconstitutional for the government to meddle in your business practices. You should all be fighting for the Do-not-call-list to get destroyed. This simply opens the doors for your government to drop new laws for determining what you can and cannot do as a business, and worse, it's based on..people being annoyed.
No matter what the court ruling on this ever will be as to whether telemarketers have to abide by the national list or now, the list itself is a good thing and will help people.
To the folks who say, "Oh no! We are giving them a list of valid telephone numbers!" -- They can get this anywhere. The phone company makes it available every year in printed form, and you can buy it for the entire nation in electronic form for merely a few thousand bucks.
What the telemarketing companies now have is a list of 50 million people that they'd waste money calling because they're almost certainly not going to buy anything from a telemarketer. Simple economics will dictate that they should use the list whether or not they legally have to. It will help their bottom line. Hell, customers of the telemarketing firms are likely ASKING the companies to avoid the numbers in all no-call lists because they dont want to pay for calls that are less likely to result in sales.
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
The FCC regulates the nation's communications infrastructure. The FTC regulates, in part, how trade is conducted. If overuse of the telephone network's bandwidth were the primary problem created by telemarketing, it might make more sense for the do-not-call list to be in the FCC's domain. But that isn't the problem, so it makes perfect sense to give it to the FTC.
Regardless, as others have said, it's Congress choice, whether it makes sense or not. The only party who appears to be overstepping his authority here is the OK judge.
Besides, as we all know, the FCC is a captive agency-- i.e., it primarily serves the interests of the industry that uses public resources (airwaves, et al.) that the agency was ostensibly created to regulate in the public interest. So, assuming that you want to actually do something in the public interest, it's best not to give the job to the FCC.
This seems to be just another way in which we can see that corporate america is controlling the government. I'm sorry, but what is the definition of a democracy? It's a system of government where the majority rules. It's clear that the majority of people would WANT this Do Not Call list, but still, this kind of stuff persists.
Canadian Cynic, canadian politics is less boring than you
I think the calls (sic) to harrass the judge are misplaced - you can see his workings, either he is right, in which case I've no doubt congress with tweak the legislation, or he is wrong in which case his ruling will be over-turned.
What I must admit I don't understand is why theDMA would object to this - direct marketeers in the UK are broadly supportive of the similar Telemarketing Preference Service. Using the list should allow telemarketers to get better returns, more bang-per buck for each call.
Curious.
if anyone is having reservations about calling, just think of it as harrassing a very very influencial DMA employee.
I believe that my right to call anyone to sell anything is protected under the Constitution of the United States! We should relish in this blow for freedom and against the tyranny of government interference.
So, have something you were going to sell on eBay? Here are some numbers to call. I'm sure they'll be glad to discover that you are as committed to the free enterprise system as they are!
Fscking moron! Oh wait, he's in Oklahoma so that explains it :)
This is not a constitutional issue. The ruling will be overturned. If for some reason it manages to pass the appeals process, there is a good chance that congress will simply make it a law. The 1st Amendment protects your right to speak freely to others in public places. It protects your right to speak out against the government with the spoken or printed word. It does not empower you to threaten or harass others. It does not allow you to enter a person's private property (either on foot or over electronic line) to sell your wares. That is commerce, not speech. There are enough rulings on this to be sure that do-not-call will eventually go through.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
>I wonder how they'd like to get 50 million emails & phone calls telling them to go fsck themselves...
They'd like that very much since they could sell those 50 million VALID email addresses to the OTHER scumbags of the 'net : spammers.
CALL the DMA, don't EMAIL them!
You still have to follow the law, regardless of the size of a particular lynchmob. The number of people who signed up is totally irrelevant.
Even if Congress gave the authority to the FTC, the judge ruled that the law was unconstitutional. You lose.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Dude, I did basic training and AIT at Ft. Sill. If Lawton represents the rest of the state, you have a lot of explaining to do.
BWTF do I know? I live in Sitka, AK.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Typically when a federal agency establishes rules that affect a particular industry, input into the rule making process from the affected industry is part of the process. I don't know to what extent the FTC can now hold a public hearing, invite the DMA and whoever else they want, and then say, "Thank you for your input." and establish the same do not call registry but that's what it sounds like is all they have to do.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Here's an idea : take the websites of telemarketers and spammers and include their emails in as many webpages as we can.
;-)
Spambots will harvest those emails and render them useless with tons of spams in only a few weeks.
Then the telemarketers will sue the spammers, the spammers will counter-sue, and they'll both sue themselves into oblivion.
Hey, don't call my idea crazy, I'm just an optimist!
Lets say I own a phone company and one of my customers is a telemarketing agency. My customer (the telemarketer), would tell me that they need a feature that would prevent them from completing a phone call to someone who is on a do not call list. I would set up the telemarketer's phone service so that every time they made a call, my switch would query a database containing the numbers which are registered on a do-not-call list. If the called number appears on the list, the telemarketer would hear an announcement stating that the "number you have reached does not accept telemarketing calls". Point is, I don't think the telemarketers themselves have a physical hard-copy of the list. It would be really cumbersome and inefficient because the DNC list would be changing constantly. The telemarketers are still making "cold-calls" but they don't have to worry about completing a call to a DNC listed number. If the service fails, the telemarketer could claim immunity from any penalties (legal/monetary) because his/her telephone provider is supposed to keep him/her in check. Hope that clarifies how this works.......
Why not turn the tables, and attack the attacker?
So let's see:
A black list stores evil SPAM IP addresses
The new, Extra-Black-List (EBL) stores evil SPAM DOS attacker IP addresses
There must be *something* that could be done to these guys!
No one likes telemarketers, especially the ones who do not get the hint when you tell them you want nothing they have to offer. A ban or do-not-call list proved a welcomed and very popular piece of legislature, but it may not be legal. Just because the judge's decision is unpopular does not mean it is the wrong one. After all, the telemarketers would not be in that business if there was not a market.
Many of the slashdotters I read seem to have similar political beliefs to myself: government power should be kept to a minimum by preventing it from expanding and rolling it back in many areas. Our government operates on precedent, with any decision on law becoming potential justification for future laws. This do-not-call list does interfere with state-to-state commerce and does set significant precedent for federal regulation of telecommunications-based commerce. The possibility exists that the same precedent in this case could be used for ill or favor in the upcoming challenges of the California spam law, and all eyes are focused on this judge and any rulings this case may generate.
The short-term results are easily seen and criticized. No one wants intrusive telemarketers calling their homes with products they do not want. Until a grass-roots campaign removes this particular market telemarketers will still exist, but they have a legitimate right to protest if they feel their rights as a business are threatened. Let us hope that the court sets a wise precedent and that the telemarketers lose in such a way that does not potentially threaten the rights of anyone in the process.
As long as there is a Second Amendment, there will always be a First Amendment.
every state is in the red, the national debt is climbing by the second, nearly every developed country is seeing amerika and the Administration as colonial overloards, civil rights are being eroded in the name of patriotism, corporate irresponsibility--both fiscal and environmental--continue, millions can't go to a doctor, and millions of those who can can't afford the medicine that's perscribed, and we give a shit about telemarketing.
please.
!(^((ri)|(mp))aa$)
...is the telemarketing industry's reaction to this list. From the way they're behaving, they seem to believe that if the do-not-call list is blocked, then all fifty million people on that list will magically want to receive telemarketing phone calls again, and be happy to buy from telemarketers.
If I were running a telemarketing business, I'd think I would be glad for that list, as it means fewer negative prospects and thus a higher percentage of sales.
But then, what do I know?
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
Though this may be a useless plea on Slashdot, please, please do not harass this judge. According to the rules, this may have been done with an improper procedure. If so, it will be redone correctly or fixed somehow. Harassing the judge will accomplish nothing and cause serious harm, both in time and reputation.
Access to Court Records (online) costs $.07 per page. Are they kidding? What kind of scam is this? How much tax dollars are wasted on the court system elsewhere and they need a revenue stream to support an online system? I think it's just to restrict the court rulings from the average citizen.
-- No sig for you!
I just use my cell phone.
Anything you might ever need to say about anything has already been said better by Penny Arcade.
There are three call centers in this city employing an average of 800 people per day. The have one rule, only call the US. Each company goes out of business every few years and the "lists" are resold with the button reset-meaning people who asked not to be called will recieve calls on a regular basis.
It seens lawyers are more important than the law itself
Edmond, OK 73003
(405)348-0818
Vinita, OK 74301
(918)256-4160
...Nothing interesting here. Just move along...
Why you gotta go and say something like that man?
First of all there is no limitless supply of poor people in Oklahoma. It's not like say, INDIA with 300 Million English speaking pool of employable workers.
Secondly, it's cliche and ignorant to group poorer people in the US or Oklahoma for that matter as being black, or if white, infering that that they are trashy.
what? what I thought we were in the trust tree in the nest, were we not?
I want to file an Amicus brief, and I WANT TO CALL THIS ASSHOLE
Yes, because I'm sure some Slashdot pudwhacker knows more about our contries laws than this judge does.
Honestly, most of the comments I see here about this issue are retarded. Let the legal system work.
You people piss and moan about all the freedoms that the government takes away from you, be thankful we have a legal system to examine and challege the actions that government bodies take. Otherwise, Ashcroft would guillotine anyone who wears a turban, the RIAA would be slashing your eardrums at night while you sleep and bill gates would be banging your sister.
Clearly, everyone's pulling for this, I know I don't want to get called during dinner, but laws are laws and they need to be applied evenly and fairly. You can't have you cake and eat it too.
Feel free to give them a buzz and let them know how you feel about their minions calling you all the f---ing time!! Or better yet send a lengthy e-mail.
American Teleservices Association
1666 K Street, NW, Suite 1200
Washington, DC 20006
Toll Free: (877) 779-3974
info@ataconnect.org
DMA, U.S. Security, Chartered Benefit Services Inc., Global Contact Services Inc. and InfoCision Management Corp. These are companies you should hate day in and day out, because they are the sleazy intermediates that pawn off wares from various companies. I say wide scale DOS is in order for these fuckers. Hell maybe if they rely on IP telephony we can shut their asses down! I HATE TELEMARKETERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If I were a telemarketeer's customer, I would expect to pay based on results, rather than effort. I'm surprised the free market in the U.S. hasn't pushed telemarketers towards this model.
As has been shown with P2P, what 50 million americans want to be able to do, and what 50 million americans can do are two completely seperate things.
10. Call everybody on it.
9. Use it to pick lottery numbers.
8. Send $1 to the first person on the list, then add your name to the bottom and forward it to 10 friends.
7. Same as above, but put your name at the top of the list.
6. Tell John Ashcroft it's a list of suspected terrorists.
5. Create the ultimate uncrackable password: echo `cat donotcalllist`
4. Reduce the national deficit by selling it back to the telemarketers for a pretty penny.
3. Register every phone number as a new Internet domain (212-555-1234.com) to help thwart Verisign.
2. Filter it through the Unix command "tr aeiou eioua" and remark how everybody's names look Swedish.
1. Turn in the bastards to the RIAA.
Congress just got done bitch-slapping the FCC over media ownership rules. I suggest that while they still have their bitch-slapping gloves on, they turn around and smack this judge a good one. With 50 million pissed off people behind it, it shouldn't be too hard to convince your local rep to push through legislation explicitly granting the FTC this authority before the ink's dry on the judge's order. While they're at it, maybe they could find some funds to help the FTC hunt down and sue spammers selling illegal (in the USA) goods. That'd pretty much cover my entire spam load these days, too.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
According to their website:
Only Robin Cauthron in the Oklahoma City area on record:
This is just so delicious. Year 2000 USA Election Statistics
National Popular Vote for Gore: 50,996,116
National Popular Vote for Bush: 50,456,169
The question of course is WHICH 50 million was 'wrong' ;-)
The court held that it was "inappropriate" for Congress to have allowed the FTC to interpret the congressional orders on its own, saying it "raises serious constitutional questions."
Recent US Supreme Court decisions have ruled that Do-Not-Call registries are legal, so there is no free speach issue no matter what the DMA wants to argue.
The constitutional issue is the seperation of legislative and executive power. The congress granted the FTC the authority to make rules concerning telemarketing fraud. The court felt that this rule was outside the authority granted by congress. An executive branch agency does not have the ability to make law, but the do have the ability to make the rules used to implement a law. The court held that the FTC overreached, it tried to make law instead of rules.
Congress now needs to make a law authorizing the FTC to implement a Do-Not-Call registry.
It is important to our system of checks and balances that executive rule making authority not be unchecked.
So if they have the free speech rights to call me, even though I don't want to hear them, I wonder if I have the right to blow a referee whistle into the phone when I determine its a telemarketer?
I admire the FTC for creating the list, but I also agree with the judge's opinion that the agency overstepped its authority in creating it. Fortunately, several states' attornies general have worked together to create do not call lists that can stand up to court tests.
While I'd like to see this as a federal government project (I can hardly believe that I just wrote that) because it involves interstate communications, it seems like any single federal agency that tries to implement one is going to end up stepping (in a legal sense) on some other agency's toes, something that the telemarketing industry will certainly exploit. But at least it seems to work pretty darned well on a state level.
-h-
It is time to "reach out and touch someone" as the old TelCo slogan says.
That's either going to be overturned on appeal, or the FCC and FTC will work out some organizational way to deal with it.
Even with the judge's ruling, the do-not-call registry should still apply to businesses directly regulated by the FCC, such as telephone companies.
That way they pay for it, and you don't get called...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
Or he got paid enough to not care what 50 million people think.
According to this MSNBC Article: President Bush on Tuesday signed legislation creating a national "do-not-call" list intended to help consumers block unwanted telemarketing calls.
But according to this new article: The U.S. District Court in Oklahoma City said the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority when it set up the popular anti-telemarketing measure, according to a court decision filed late on Tuesday.
OK, now I'm confused....How did the FTC overstep its authority if it supposedly did exactly what the President wanted? Or was the DNC list supposed to implemented by some other government organization?
...small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri...
either telemarking is legal or it isn't... clouding the issue with a "do not call" list is stupid.
WHO WOULD NOT WANT TO BE ON THAT LIST?!
by creating the list you kill the industry. this judge realizes that and is taking action.
if the list is legal, then you might as well just make telemarking ILLEGAL... same effect.
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
So now the US government has a large database of valid consumer phone numbers to sell phone spamers
No. This has nothing to do with the state ag's. It's a FEDERAL list.
Instead, ask the FCC to just take it over and run it like they should have done in the first place.
unfortunately there is nothing in Oklahoma worth hitting with a plane. now burning bibles on the other hand.
I never really looked at the numbers associated with the DNC list. It seems like more Americans participated in this than they did in the last presidential election.
Woohoo!
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
50 million people have spoken against telemarketing. The Do Not Call list could be regarded as a petition couldn't it? So why is Oklahoma against the people? Smells like somebody is selling out...
that the list of 50 million do-not-call numbers be released to the DMA for "market research purposes". In other news, the Federal court in Oklahoma has suspend its judicial calendar to take a fact finding mission to Las Vegas where the judges will enjoy an all-expense paid bacchanal courtesy of the DMA.
=^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
he'd have chucked his invention in the trash and announced voice over wire, if not impossible, something not desirable. "I had this vision - once the 'telephone', as I call it, had been installed in households everywhere, becoming an essential instrument, suddenly every quack medicine peddlar would begin abusing it. Mark Twain was right, I should not have invented it".
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Oklahoma judges ? like their office and home numbers so we could call them and let them know how much we appreciate their looking out for the corporatio^H^H^H^H^H^H^H the people of the US...
50 Million people for GOD SAKES, more than ever turn out for an election...about time we start fighting back using whatever tools are available...US federal judges like direct marketing let's start giving them a taste of it...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Being from Texas, we don't do give a damn about Oklahoma. Okies go down!
This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
If your list of telephone numbers was cleansed of people who are definitely not going to buy your goods, isn't that going to make your business more effective?
On how long before the DMA files the first FOIA request for the contents of said DNC list?
Telemarketer: "Oh boy! 50 MILLION [pinky to mouth] valid phone numbers!!!!!!!"
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
Incidentally, the Supreme Court ruled on four previous occasions that corporations were not "persons," but the railroads kept bringing new cases until they got their way.
You stupid motherfucker. Yeah, I'm gonna AC this, but let's get this straight. Your fuckshit semantic arguments that harassing people in their homes is a question of "free speech" is quibbling, you goddamn fucking fuckhole.
You and no one else in the this goddamn fucking country has the right of free speech in anyone's private home. Do you even understand what the First Amendment is about? Maybe you should stop sucking your daddy's cock, take the butt plug out your arse, read the First Amendment, and then THINK about what you're saying.
The right to free speech only applies to public spaces and governmental institutions. If I do not allow anyone including myself to speak freely on my property, that is perfectly legal and in keeping with the Constitution.
Stop being such a twat and just go shoot your fat ugly self. God, but you're dumb.
Since I've seen this in numerous posts... please people, count right. The article said 50 million phone numbers are in the list, not people. I don't know about anybody else, but my household has 3 phone numbers associated with it, I have some friends that have 4 or 5 numbers that they have. Presumably, someone would list all the numbers associated with them, not just a single one.
At a quick estimate, that puts the number close to 15 million people, not 50. (Okay, okay... still a big number, but a much smaller one when you consider that the US has about 275 million total. Around 5% instead of 18%)
...the DMA has the judge in its pocket.
You know, like a shiny penny you can take out, examine, play with, overturn popular laws with, and then put back in your pocket.
"Is that a judge in your pocket, or are you just happy to sue me?"
Unfortunately, there are people in society who will just hand over a credit card number, or say "bill me later" to anybody who wants to sell them stuff.
frob
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
It's unrestricted if you have the $7200 per year required to download it.
It is *not* a free download, something that has gotten little publicity. It's only free to charities and pollsters and the like. Companies are required to purchase it, at a cost of $25 per area code, up to a maximum of around $7300.
While I'm a fan of the idea, I was surprised to learn about the costs involved. I love the idea of a do not call list, but using it as a way to tax telemarking calls just seems a bit shady.
Just to let you know. They still get your number. *67 does not work on 911, toll-free and 900 services.
"Please be aware that the FCC has ruled that certain types of calls, including 911, 900, 976, and toll free numbers (800, 888, 877, etc.), are exempt from Caller ID blocking. Non-Published and Non-Listed numbers will be forwarded on calls to these service providers, even if per call or per line blocking is activated."
Verizon as one source for this information.
Booooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is a bunch of crap!
someone posted this to the Yahoo message center.
t m
sounds like a good suggestion to me to send the judge a POLITELY worded fax thanking him for his betrayal of the American public.
Call or fax him and tell him what you think!
Chambers Page for
The Honorable Lee R. West
Senior United States District Judge
Western District of Oklahoma
U.S. Courthouse
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140
Chambers Facsimile: 405-609-5151
http://www.okwd.uscourts.gov/west.h
I'm good with numbers -
And email addresses to go with each number.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
If it does get overturned direct marketers now have a huge list of people they CAN call. I'm sure they would have paind mega bucks for 50 million valid numbers.
If they overturn this do-not-call list, and presumably the state lists as well... and if the telemarketers start calling me again... I will have no mercy in giving them a hard time. When I used to receive telemarking calls (before getting on TN's do-not-call list a few years ago), I would always feel a little guilty for harrassing the telemarketers. No more. If they overturn the do-not-call lists and start calling again, I will have no mercy. I suspect about 50 million people feel the same way I do!
Judges should be elected, and not appointed. They should go through the same process as any other official.
// End Rant
I don't need some idiot in some appointed power back when Lincoln was president, making rulings that slavery is still the way to go.
(yes, fecicious... but still you get the point)
Same thing here.. we have old farts in the system that don't even know how to use a computer, ruling on cases such as Copyright, that affect the lives of people who DO know how to use them.
So instead of this moron judge voting this way because the top two busineses in OK are telemarketers!!!! He should have voted the will of the people 50 million of them, and said FU to them. And he would have, if he was elected. But instead, he's there for good, and could give two craps about what the people think.
www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
This is going to confuse almost every single American who catches it on the 11:00 news tonight. They'll think "we /wanted/ this! isn't this a democracy?! who does this judge think he is??". There's already evidence of this here on /.
My point being that they won't even question whether or not this can (or should) be regulated or legislated, because they're all so blinded by People Power and the infallibility of democracy. They'll be so caught up in 50 million Americans being listed, let alone the ones who just plain like the idea that they'll think it just perverse that -anyone- would dare question it.
It's all about getting it done, not getting it done in the right way, by the right people, or for the right reasons. The People have made their decree and may the spoilers who try and defy it be damned!
where'd my typewriter go?
This is most likely going to get modded into oblivion, seeing as how I'm not going to follow the rest of the Slashbots, but what the hell, I've got plenty of karma to burn.
I personally feel that the DNC list is a Good Idea(tm). I dislike telemarketing calls as much as any other slashdotter, and I feel that a national DNC list is a step in the right direction. What bothers me, however, is the amount of knee-jerk screamings coming from slashdotters. A good number of posters like to cry foul when they feel that the checks and balances that are so important to a proper government have been ignored; however in this case, when a federal court has checked the power of the FTC (by ruling that they had overstepped their bounds) the vast majority of posters seem to be ready to lynch this judge. Which is it going to be, people? Either checks and balances are important ALL THE TIME (not just when the RIAA comes after your ISP because you leave KaZaA on 24/7) or they're not important AT ALL. This ruling has not killed the National DNC registry, it has simply stated that the FTC does not have the necessary authority to implement such a thing. This isn't about jobs, this isn't about free speech, this is about our government working as it should. Why such an uproar? If the FTC does not have the authority to implement an DNC list, then surely another government agency does. If it turns out that the FTC does in fact have the authority to implement a National DNC List, then I'm certain they will do so, and do so quickly. In the meantime, can we all maybe take a DEEP BREATH here, and calm the fuck down? Instead of posting your demands that this judge be hanged, drawn, and quartered; why not post what you feel are the relavent portions of law that give the FTC the authority to do this? Why not begin an intelligent debate, where you actually cite facts to back up your statements, instead of spouting off your idiocy for all to see?
Oh, wait. This is slashdot...Why do we need a do-not-call list in the first place? If telemarketers call you, just tell them not to call again. They can't legally call you back for 10 years. If they do, you get to make your own phone call- to the FTC.
OH NOES!!! IT APPEARS YUO DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY FOR DIS HERE PIZZA! WAHT EVER ARE YOU GOING TO DO!?!?
Wasn't there some kind of law passed that made it illegal to crack a computer over a network? Isn't this considered a bad thing, if an unwanted individual had access to your electronic valuables?
Well, since I bought my phone, and I pay for my phone line, I've decided to start calling my phone a "computer" as a pet name. Therefore, any unwanted individual that calls me is accessing my equipment (as it is on a network) without me giving permission. Wouldn't telemarketing be colored as illegal in this case?
I know that it's a bit of a stretch, but I'm beginning to see less of a difference between voice communication and data communication, especially since that phone gets interfaced with one of the best analog computers in the world (my brain. :-P).
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
Before the national do-not-call list was created, Texas had their own no-call list. I wonder how this ruling affects the Texas list. To be on the list, one has to pay about $5 to cover a 5 year period. When the national list was created, Texas did not transfer their list data to the national list because of privacy reasons, so the Texas list is seperately enforced.
So how long before Dave Barry publishes the Oklahoma judge's phone number? ;)
That sentence had to do with a different issue addressed in the DMA's complaint, which had to do with telemarketers charging pre-acquired account numbers, instead of getting them directly from the callee. The judge ruled for the FTC on that issue.
Your mileage may vary, but mine is constant.
I don't remember the exact quote but Ray Kroc (one of the founders of McDonalds) said "When I sold door-to-door I focused on the houses that had 'No Soliciting' signs because those people were actually the ones most likely to buy."
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
I am disturbed by the multitudes of people out there who think that this national No-Call List is the answer to harrassment by marketing companies. Unless you are going through reasonable measures to ensure your own privacy, no list is going to secure it for you... What the whole argument comes down to goes back to the old argument of "assumption of privacy." This legal grey area has historically been the subject of much interpretation, most extensively in defining what constitutes a legal search and seizure under law enforcement auspices. For example, you get pulled over by the local John Q. Law. In most locales anything in plain view can be searched, as anything that is in "plain view" of the public cannot be reasonably assumed "private." But some states (Florida, for instance) have extended the assumption of privacy to exclude the trunk of your automobile. So, anything in your trunk is not considered private, and therefore subject to search (without a warrant). Again, the line here is extremely subjective to the governing body. How does this extend to a National No-Call list? It all goes back to "assumption of privacy." The offending party (telemarketer) must be shown to have access to information that is reasonably defined as "private." How "private" is your phone number if it is listed in your local phone book, available at every public phone booth? What about that frequent shopper card you signed up for at the local grocery? Some cards, in the fine print, use information about your purchases to market products. By signing up for the card, you are giving consent to this monitoring. Let's not even begin to talk about internet usage monitoring. So, reasonably, you are already providing what you think is "private" information to third parties. If the telemarketer gets information by your consent (explicit or implied), is it really invasion of privacy? Just some things to consider. Many of the services you already elicit come with extra strings attached that go against what you would consider priveledged information. Even if a national No-Call List becomes a reality, all it takes is some little piece of fine print you fail to read when signing up for a new credit card to supercede the list's effective power.
The problem being regulated really is a trade practice. Which the FTC would have jurisdiction over. Unfortunately the practice involves communication which falls in the FCC's lap also. So in a sense it's a shared jurisdiction issue.
The FTC should have the right to decide how the business practice is exercised and what rules are binding to that process up until the telemarketer gets onto the phone. If the business practice is curtailed then there's really not much left for the FCC to do but deal with the content and types of communication going out after the telemarketer is actually on the phone.
See one deals with the situation before the call and one deals with it during and after the call.
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
Actually I believe war-dialers like that ARE in fact illegal regardles of DNC lists.
Regardless, war dialers are used, and with increasing frequency. Where I used to work they had blocks of phone numbers and I would hear the phones ring at the other desks, and then hear my phone ring and hear a pre-recorded message about how I've just won a discount vacation to Disney[tm]land or whatever.
I've noticed a sharp increase in pre-recorded messages to my home as well. From what I understand these are a big no no and at one time the gub'ment cracked down hard on them. I guess it has been too long since and now the scum sucking telemarketers are using them again. (I think there was even a Simpsons episode about it.)
One time I was pissed off and decided to call the phone company to ask if there is anything I could do about it. The person would only suggest that I contact the Attorney General's office.
I have caller ID and most of the time lately I just don't answer the phone if it says "Out of Area" or "Unavailable" or whatever. I'm starting to think it is time to start f*#@ing with them.
If we can't have our national do not call list and they insist on bugging us, then lets waste their time as well. See how long you can keep the person on the phone without buying or agreeing to anything. I've also thought of just doing nothing but Meowing at them. But if you can keep them on the phone for a while without buying anything then it really hits the profits of the telemarketing company. Maybe I'll keep them on the phone for a while and then start Meowing at them.
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
Telemarketers have had the DB since Aug 1, at which point the "first wave" ended and the telemarketers had 1 month to scrub their call list. In a week, they were supposed to have their lists cleared out to stop calling the numbers they already have and ready for the next update of people who signed up this month.
The only thing more dangerous than a file named -rf is renaming it -rf\ /
This judge is probably safe working here in Oklahoma. A few months before the national do not call registry was implemented, Oklahoma implemented their own state registry. So, the judge is surrounded by a state full of people that this decision won't affect.
Oklahoma Don't Call Registry
SharkJumper
You retards. Don't be completely stupid. You can't block the phone number from a company's 800 number because they are paying for the call.
I know, I work for a company that sells 800 service. You can *67 and run modemjammer.exe if it gives you a hard on, but we still have your number. *67 works for Caller ID, not ANI.
For proof of this call a number with ANI service like: *67,,,1-800-964-0176
Perhaps you'd be better at offering telephone advice to persons living in Afghanistan.
I forsee a time not far off when the government has been sufficiently commercialized as to require citizen-units to pay attention to advertising (probably dolled up as some sort of "save the economy" jihad). But unless and until that happens, let me finish my dinner in peace, ferchrissake!
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
He isn't going to change his mind for you. You're just going to piss him (and his clerks) off, and you might get the FBI or the Federal Marshals interested in you. Harassing a federal judge is a really bad idea.
Instead, if you feel the need to call anyone, call the FTC and/or the DOJ and ask them to appeal the decision. Or call your Congressman/Senator and ask them to change the law.
Or (if you live in DC like me) silently fume because you don't have a voice in government. Give DC voting rights now!
This is America, there's no "evenly and fairly" here.
Some thug robs someone for $120 and he's in jail for 18 months, Enron executives, guilty of stealing millions from their employees, are getting off with a small fine and no jail time. Is that fair?
Roman Polanski drugs and rapes a 13 year old girl and runs off to France to escape justice and is STILL ALLOWED TO WORK and even win the industry's top honor. Were he a "commoner" he would have been put in federal "pound you in the ass" prison like he should have. Is that fair?
The sad truth is we can't just "let the legal system work" because the legal system is run by cash, and normal people are constantly screwed over by it while those with money either get off scott free or with a weak plea bargain that's not really a punishment.
This ruling just shows how much money can influence the decisions of even an "objective" judge and tilt his decision in the direction of those with deep pockets.
If whales learn how to use weapons we're all screwed!
The links on the FTC and FCC websites both point to the same database.
The judge, and his clerks, need to do some basic research (i.e. do their jobs).
Apparantly the entire state of Oklahoma works in the telemarketing industry :) :)
DNC list was/is good but it still has loopholes - people and companies pretending to do "surveys" can still call you and so can the "non-profit" orgs. So the next time someone calls you and asks if they could ask you questions, it's most likely because they want to sell you something or put you on mail list for junk mail... So blue is your favorite color, eh? Ok, come down to Billy Bob's auto - we got plenty of cars in that color
And I am pretty sure these laws don't apply for companies outside US who can, thanks to cheap labor and low rates, call your at 9pm on Sunday.
I saw this coming, and I prepared. Meet... the the Do Call Registry! For those of us who don't get enough telemarketing calls. :)
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
Oklahoma has their own Do Not Call list that has been around since sometime in 2002. One theory is that this is another State Gov. vs. Fegeral Gov. thing. Sort of like female nude mud wrestling, do any of us really care who wins? One thing I find a bit bassakwords is on the Oklahoma state webpage, it states, "Any registrations on the Attorney General's Web site prior to June 1, 2003 have already been added to the National list, but those after that date must register numbers at both Web sites." I'm wondering if this is another New York Time-ish "I'll just make up this news story because it sounds better" sort of thing?
Contact your senators and representatives, at the very least by email, instead of harassing the judge who made the decision (no matter what your opinion of him). The directories are here:
House of Representatives
Senate
Yes that is him, his house is valued at $192,256... it is 2,834 sq feet and the previous owners were Harvey and Nelda McDaniel. I am not going to print the address, but it took me ~5min to find this info.
It is really time for county assessors to come up with a better system for making Assessment records public while still respecting privacy.
The whole reason the can call and harass us is because corperations have been given constitutional rights over the years. What we as an american public have to do is take these constitutional rights away from corperations.
This case tests their right to free speech. Corperations have no right to free speech, buisnesses do (the difference being, a corperation has stock, a buisness doesn't because a buisness is run by an owner and hence, derives it's rights from the owner. Read gangs of america, it's free in pdf if you search google.
The reason I didn't sign up is becuase of 1 simple reason. If the list is made useless in this sense meaning nobody can uphold it, guess where it's gonna be sent or rather sold to? It has names, addresses, and phone numbers all ripe for the plucking. Normally they have to go through a phone book or some other service, but this database can be added to other databases to make the databases even more complete. Whupdefucking do.
Plus, the whole "you havta send it in NOW NOW NOW!!!" smelled of all kinds of bullshit. I'll believe it and sign up when I see it.
Candy-Coated Knowledge
Companies that have any telemarketing (or potentially telemarketing; there are some grey areas you wouldn't expect) aspects already have the database. It's a 500 MB compressed download, and let me tell you, inserting 50+ million rows into a database was a bit of a rush, since it was by far the largest insert that I've ever run. Never seen the database CPU/DiskAccess chart read quite like that before :)
As for destroying the database, why? The table has two fields: areacode and phonenumber. I can't think of any useful purpose that telemarketers would have for it, given that you can get an electronic copy of whitepages from any number of sources that have addresses and names.
Actually the 3 panel was correct, in the decision of bush v gore (or how to steal a country, go from a budget SURPLUS to an AMAZING deficit that even bush Sr. never reached, and start a holy war...) the supreme court (voting along party lines) said much the same thing as the 3 judge panel. Face it people, justice in america is now up for sale, start the bidding at 1m and work your way up. "Stop repeat offenders, don't re-elect them"
I doubt that it would have the effect that you want. The best thing to do is write your Representatives, Senators, and President about these issues. Removal of a judge can occur at that level, but not at the district court level.
All that you'd be promoting is one really pissed off court receptionist.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
Ah, the joys of calling from your neighbors' phones.
"Excuse me, could I borrow a cup of sugar and use your phone for a second? It's toll-free, don't worry."
But them telemarketers....they ain't human.
Messing with a Federal Judge is going to get you in some serious trouble. DON'T DO IT!
He was most likely applying the law as it pertained right now. He is tied. Circuit to Federal level judges don't bend the law. So don't think that he is doing this because he is getting paid. Trust me. If he is a high judge he is getting paid well.
He is upholding and making decisions about the law.
He cannot change the law. That is the job of congress, who let all of these telcos do all of these shady phone practices for years before your phone became a useless, crappy, devalued freakin' ring box that calls more from marketers than anything else. I know before I PAID to have telemarketer block on my phone, I would get about EIGHT CALLS A DAY. Blame the regulators, not the judge.
EITHER WAY, IT IS NOT THE JUDGE'S PROBLEM THAT THE LAW IS FAULTY. AND MY FRIENDS, THE LAW IS FAULTY.
See? This is why we have laws in the US that protect you specifically even if you don't agree witht the masses. YOUR RIGHTS ARE PARAMOUNT. You cannot bitch when the Telemarketers are doing the same right now. WE JUST GOTTA CHANGE THEM NOW.
I personally can't wait till the telemarketers go down in flames, but don't hang a judge that is following the letter of a law that needs to be modernized.
We've all "opted-in" to this list. A reasonable judge could consider this a public statement that we do not want to receive unsolicited sales calls. Knowing this, further sales calls to people on that registry could be construed as harrassment.
Maybe we can DDOS them with harrassment lawsuits?
We should all call him at dinner time and let him know what we think about his ruling.
Who? ;) *Where's my gun?*
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Call the asshole judge and ask him where the U.S Constitution guarantees an audience for free speech...
.pdf
The Honorable Lee R. West
Senior United States District Judge
Western District of Oklahoma
U.S. Courthouse
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140
Chambers Facsimile: 405-609-5151
clickity here and slashdot his website too... don't forget to download his
Then how about calling them from a cell phone? If I remember right, telemarketers calling your cell phone can result in hefty fines.
That makes us all worms?
-1
As listed at http://www.ataconnect.org/contact.htm, the phone number of the American Teleservices Association is 866-500-4272. E-mail is info@ataconnect.org. They are the guys who sued to get this overturned. Call them and tell them what you think!
Right, because it was those poor fucking secretaries who rendered this decision, and I'm sure they are very much advocates of phone spam. For Christ's sake, why not shoot his dog too, as I'm sure Fido is a big telemarketing fan as well.
If you're going to do anything that immature, at least hit the right target- call him at home.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
posting someone's phone number is not the same as harassing him or her. It's the people who dial up the phone-number on speed-dial who are harassing, not those who post it on a website.
Quite frankly, this guy deserves to get telemarketer calls 24/7
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Well I said that the 50 million peopel should be asked, never said had to. but hey I would write in saying EXACTALY what you have said here if that ever happaned.
Basiclay say, hey free speach syre, but hey I do not need to be forced to waste my time lissing to your free speach. I can chose which chanals on tv I watch. so why can't I decide who can call my house right.
I was very polite, as was his court clerk.
The following is the contact information:
U.S. Courthouse
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140
Chambers Facsimile: 405-609-5151
I really believe he needs an increased volume of calls to drive home the dislike of his ruling.
I have read his order, etc. and disagree with his findings and action. You can read it too at the court's website.
-- Tomas
I'm concerned about people who provided cell numbers and unlisted numbers to the list.
Telemarketers have been able to download the list for some time now from donotcall.org. That means they not only have verified that your number is current but that they also have the potential to add to their call lists additional numbers they did not have before.
The nice lady at the court office said attorney's from neither side had ever mentioned that issue and that the judge had not considered it. I asked whether it was not incumbent upon a responsible judge to educate himself as to all the ramifications of any ruling he might make, whether those issues were raised by the parties or not. I reminded her that up to 50 million people are unofficial and apparently unrepresented parties to the suit and I would think the judge should have given a little thought to protecting my privacy rights as he made his ruling.
Congressman Tauzin's aide who is specifically taking calls re this ruling said 1) this issue isn't over - they are looking at legislation and/or challenges to the ruling and that they are moving quickly and 2) as far as she knows, no one at the legislative level has thought about the issue of unlisted numbers which might now be on that list in the hands of telemarketers. Oops. By the way, I started and ended that conversation by expressing appreciation to the Congressman for his efforts on our behalf.
Charlie, who answered the consumer complaint phone for the FTC Southeast region, was a little confused at first as to what my concern was. As soon as he "got it," he asked to be excused for a moment. When he came back a good while later, he reported that as far as they could tell, the download was still available on the website and they were escalating the question up the chain to the national level as quickly as possible so that someone could address it pronto. Good on Charlie! Very sharp young man -- he deserves a promotion!!
Don't you just love the level of foresight on the part of those working to "protect" our privacy? I mean, I truly do appreciate the effort, but they need to do their homework a little better.
computerlady - a brand new Slash-daughter - alone, but no longer invisible, in the
100 telemarketing companies (and their 2 paltry million employees)
Please. The US population is near 291 million.
Don't tell me that these one hundred companies employ more people than Wal-Mart. That is bull.
More than one out of 150 Americans are telemarketers? I don't think so.
One hundred companies divided by two million. Why, that's only TWENTY THOUSAND EMPLOYEES PER COMPANY.
LIARS! LIARS! LIARS!
Never ever trust information from a known enemy.
Congress now needs to make a law authorizing the FTC to implement a Do-Not-Call registry.
OK everyone!
Time to call your Congress-Critters!
(Is this what they mean by Karma Whoring?)
(Is asking about Karma Whoring Karma Whoring?)
(Must not start recursion here.)
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
...the other one. ;)
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Why call the judge at the office? Where do telemarketers piss you off at the most, at home I bet. I'm not sure if judges have their phone numbers in the phone book but if they do: 1. Go to switchboard.com and search for Lee West in OK. I got 7 results, two of them are Lee R West. Of those two, one of them has a (405) area code, the same as the chambers house...
I just checked the US Labor statistics.
As of 2000 129 million were employed.
The entire health care industry was 7.5 million. That means every hospital, health care supplier, doctor, nurse, nursing home, and other member of the entire industry.
By their numbers, there are more than double the number of telemarketers than there are in all aspects of the legal profession in the United States.
I would now strongly suggest that they are lying to you.
I'm pretty disappointed in CNN. What I quoted was at the top of their article and CNN's text implied that this was the basis of the finding. Now that I've actually read the ruling (yuck), it looks like it still isn't a "free speech" issue but just comes down to whether Congress really granted the FTC the authority to create a do not call list.
I find it interesting how the judge split hairs in the ruling. The FTC *has* the authority to regulate certain aspects of telemarketing (e.g., predictive dialers, abandoned calls, pre-acquired accounts) but apparently doesn't have the authority to promulgate a do not call list regulation even if Congress gives them money to do it.
It sounds like the DMA made significant use of the fact the Congress had previously given the authority to establish a do not call list to the FCC which had decided not to implement it. The judge must have been asleep for the twelve years between when the FCC legislation was enacted and now (and I guess didn't get any telemarketing calls to wake him up). Telemarketers have become a lot more agressive and intrusive since 1991.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
I'm not the parent, but I agree.
http://www.iiipublishing.com/afd/Coperson.htm
The judge's name is Lee R. West, his admin is Wilma, and her phone number in her office is 405-609-5140 (all information publicly available on the internet). Feel free to call them and express your displeasure at the Judge West's ruling. If he thinks we should not be able to stop phone calls from coming into our homes, then fine, swamp his office.
Be polite, don't swear, don't threaten, don't harass, just tell poor Wilma that you strongly disagree with Judge West's ruling, and you think it might be time for him to resign.
He didn't rule that the do not call list was illegal or unconstitutional, he simply ruled that the FTC didn't have the authority to enact and enforce the list. Congress didn't specifically give the FTC those powers and it's best that government agencies don't just accrue more power without specific grants from our elected legislators. You wouldn't want the FBI to suddenly be able to enact their own 'do not call list' of people they arrest do you? Oops, they already did...
There's a reason that the dma picked oklahoma, all the judges are extreme fucking right wing bastards paid off by lobbyists.
Fuck the free speech argument. Is the DMA paying my phone bill>? NOOOOO.
Aren't there already enough stupid people we vote for?
I don't know about you, but unless something makes the news on an issue it's already difficult to select a decent candidate. We have to choose House Members, Congress persons, Attorney Generals, District Attorneys, Sherrifs, City Council members, Mayors, Govenors, Initiatives, Propositions, Amendmants, State Justices, etc.....
A lot of times, if they have no publicity I have no idea who I should vote for. I will break down and vote party line at this point. Federal judges will just be another needle in a haystack of elected offices and the problem will continue.
I don't like appointments of office, but I can't see adding them to an already cluttered ballot.
The only way to end war is for everyone to get a piece!
One word...unbelievable.
West (the Judge) said the case hinged on the issue of "whether the FTC had the authority to promulgate a national do-not-call registry. The court finds it did not."
ohh no...
I could have sworn that congress on the 13th February passed the Do Not Call Implementation Act authorizing the FTC to do the job. Didn't Bush also sign it on March 11th.
Unless this is some typical legal, small print issue, that hasn't been noticed before, this judge has a lot to answer for.
Upsurping the will of Congress and the Predident (as well as the people) is a serious issue.
More shenanegans. Is it only me that's tired of all these legal games and BS ???
And it's a preposterous stretch - if that were the case, then nearly every election that has EVER BEEN HELD was done so in violation of the constitution. The idea that we can't even hold an election in case it's close to within 0.001% is an absolute farce.
What it was, was politicking by the Dems to get the recall postponed so A) they could have 6 more months in power, and B) to ride out the wave of interest and ultimately decrease the "angry voter" turnout.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
From the Oklahoma City University Law Press Room:
http://www.okcu.edu/law/press/nrl03020.asp
Born in Clayton, Okla., Judge West graduated from high school in Antlers, Okla. He earned his bachelor's degree in government from the University of Oklahoma, where he was elected to the honorary scholastic fraternity Phi Eta Sigma.
Following service in the United States Marine Corps (1952-1954), Judge West earned his Juris Doctor degree from the University of Oklahoma College of Law. He was selected by the faculty as the Outstanding Graduate of his law school class, served as editor of the Oklahoma Law Review and was named to the Order of the Coif.
Judge West engaged in private practice in Ada, Okla., until he joined the University of Oklahoma College of Law faculty in 1961. During 1962-1963 he was a Ford Foundation Fellow in Law teaching at Harvard Law School were he earned an L.L.M. degree. Judge West returned to private practice in 1963.
In 1965, Judge West was appointed by Governor Henry Bellmon to serve as District Judge for the 22nd Judicial District of Oklahoma, serving also as Special Justice of the Oklahoma Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals until 1973. During this time, Judge West graduated from the National College of State Trial Judges. President Richard Nixon appointed Judge West to the Civil Aeronautics Board, Washington, D.C., in 1973. He was designated the board's Acting Chairman by President Jimmy Carter in 1977.
Judge West was appointed U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Oklahoma in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter. He served as Chief Judge of the Western District from 1993 until he took senior status in November, 1994. Since that time he has remained active, hearing cases at both the district and circuit level and serving as a settlement judge in complex and protracted cases throughout the 10th Circuit. He received the Award for Judicial Excellence from the Oklahoma Bar Association in 2000.
Judge West's life story was the subject of a recent biography, Law and Laughter, The Life of Lee West, by Bob Burke, a 1979 graduate of OCU School of Law, and the Honorable David L. Russell.
OCU School of Law's graduation ceremonies will also include remarks by Daniel Gerry, president of the graduating class from St. Louis, Mo., Kyna Roberts, vice-president of the graduating class from Odessa, Texas, and Jonathan Grammer, member of the graduating class from Austin, Texas. A reception in the Naifeh Family Foyer and Reception Hall will immediately follow the ceremonies. Family, friends, alumni and interested members of the public are invited to attend the ceremonies.
National Popular Vote for Gore: 50,996,116
National Popular Vote for Bush: 50,456,169
It's years later, and you're *still* delusional over the US presidential election? News flash: there's this thing called the electoral college. It is the law of the land. It is how presidential elections are decided. If you don't like it, great, go and get it fixed. However, that is how things are decided, and popular vote is not.
That really isn't a smart thing to do. You should recognise that a judge often has to do his duty, even if he doesn't necessary agree with the moral implications of the decision he has to make.
The point about FCC/FTC powers is quite good, a testament to the powers of expensive lawyers... so really you should be pissed off at either the lawyers (whom I wouldn't recommend calling either, messing with lawyers is not usually a good idea) or the spammers themselves.
Remember, judges are quite often victims of a broken system too, as they have to play by the rules/precedents too.
The judge's home number is publicly available on the web. Link below..
Judge Lee R, West
(H)405-348-0818
(O)405-609-5140
(F)405-609-5151
info found here
Office webpage
Well, we now know which /.ers are also rednecks!
(I have no room to talk. I'm from Idaho.)
"No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
Making the list legal != telemarketing being illegal.
It just gives people a CHOICE to not be called. Did you know that stores in malls can't hand out flyers around the mall? They can only hand them out at the area immediatly in front of their own store. Did that kill the industry? Obviously not.
50 million people signed up. Maybe in your little fantasy world there are only 50 million people in the US. Here in the real world there are quite a few more than that.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
your "I'm happy with my long-distance service" speech right now.
that speech consists of 'click'. I mean seriously, it's not THAT hard to hang up on telemarketers?! Plus if you're bored you can be an ass until they hang up on you. If you're busy, dont answer the phone ^^
as far as some backwoods judge (i live in MO i can call anyone i want a redneck) deciding that we cant have a national no call list, I bet he's gonna regret that after some public reaction comes his way. hope those kickbacks were worth it
Since when has the us government been interested in millions of telemarketers in India and China losing their jobs?
who ever who said that jsut becasue the majority is not always right is getting confused with a first amendment issue & a privacy issue. WE DO NOT WANT TO BE CONTACTED / DISTURBED by people we do not know.. regardless of their intentions. THIS IS BASIC PRIVACY! I am not violating their privacy, but they are violating MINE & i want them to STOP!
jesus christ, i cannot believe they actually went forward with bringing a government act to court. seems like corporations are trying to bend laws more and more now. Look, you know those signs on people's front doors that say NO SOLICITING? that means we dont want your peddling, we dont want to be marketed. the do not call list is just another form of a no soliciting sign, in my opinion. drugs are illegal, and yet that puts thousands of people out of business by legal terms as well... are dealers gonna take the government to court to go against drug laws as well? i hate telemarketers.
Just had a nasty thought. I'm out of work. Why not get a job with them, find out the CEO's home number, and spend my work hours leaving messages on people's answering machines and saying "Fuck You! if you have any complaints, please contact our CEO at...."
No, can't do that. It would be WRONG.
btw, check out the scarry telephone about to attack some innocent children.
Also note that at least the first company does telemarketing for Charities. I remember hearing somewhere that when you give money to a telemarketer representing a charity that the telemarketing company gets most of the money. Think about this every time you get a call from a "charity."
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
Clearly, 50 million subscribers to the No Call List is AUTHORITY ENOUGH.
Actually the 3 panel was correct, in the decision of bush v gore (or how to steal a country, go from a budget SURPLUS to an AMAZING deficit that even bush Sr. never reached, and start a holy war...) the supreme court (voting along party lines) said much the same thing as the 3 judge panel. Face it people, justice in america is now up for sale, start the bidding at 1m and work your way up. "Stop repeat offenders, don't re-elect them"
I kinda wondered what the ACLU's issue in this case was until I heard them dangle "Equal Protection Clause". Ahh, Florida 2000.
I thought this is inevitable that seriously legal minded organizations would start filing contrary lawsuits using the "2000 Bush Argument" just to show how lame-brained and hypocritcial the whole situation was. The irony is that had the Supreme Court actually issued a ruling instead of an editorial, the appeals court would have been bound to uphold the 3-judge panel as it would be consistent with "Bush vs Gore".
-------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
1. If they want to loan you money, tell them you just filed for bankruptcy and you could sure use some money.
2. If they start out with, "How are you today?" say, "I'm so glad you asked, because no one these days seems to care, and I have all these problems. My arthritis is acting up, my eyelashes are sore, my dog just died . . . "
3. If they say they're John Doe from XYZ Company, ask them to spell their name. Then ask them to spell the company name. Then ask them where it is located, how long it has been in business, how many people work there, how they got into this line of work if they are married, how many kids they have, etc. Continue asking them personal questions or questions about their company for as long as necessary.
4. This works great if you are male. Telemarketer: "Hi, my name is Judy and I'm with XYZ Company. " You: Wait for a second and with a real husky voice ask, "What are you wearing?"
5. Cry out in surprise, "Judy? Is that you? Oh my God! Judy, how have you been?" Hopefully, this will give Judy a few brief moments of terror as she tries to figure out where she could know you from.
6. Say "No" over and over. Be sure to vary the sound of each one, and keep a rhythmic tempo, even as they are trying to speak. This is most fun if you can do it until they hang up.
7. If MCI calls trying to get you to sign up for the Family and Friends Plan, reply, in as sinister a voice as you can, "I don't have any friends, would you be my friend?"
8. If the company cleans rugs, respond: "Can you get out blood? Can you get out goat blood? How about human blood?"
9. After the Telemarketer gives his or her spiel, ask him or her to marry you. When they get all flustered, tell them that you can't just give your credit card number to a complete stranger.
10. Tell the Telemarketer that you work for the same company, and they can't sell to employees.
11. Answer the phone. As soon as you realize it is a Telemarketer, set the receiver down, scream, "Oh my God!" and then hang up.
12. Tell the Telemarketer you are busy at the moment and ask him/her if he/she will give you his/her home phone number so you can call him/her back. When the Telemarketer explains that telemarketers cannot give out their home numbers say, "I guess you don't want anyone bothering you at home, right?" The Telemarketer will agree and you say, "Me either!" Hang up.
13. Ask them to repeat everything they say, several times.
14. Tell them it is dinner time, but ask if they would please hold. Put them on your speaker phone while you continue to eat at your leisure. Smack your food loudly and continue with your dinner conversation.
15. Tell the Telemarketer you are on "home incarceration" and ask if they could bring you some beer.
16. Ask them to fax the information to you, and make up a number.
17. Tell the Telemarketer, "Okay, I'll listen to you. But I should probably tell you, I'm not wearing any clothes."
18. Insist that the caller is really your buddy Leon, playing a joke. "Come on, Leon, cut it out! Seriously, Leon, how's your momma?"
19. Tell them you are hard of hearing and that they need to speak up . . . louder . . . louder . . .
20. Tell them to talk very slowly, because you want to write every single word down.
R.I.P.
I support the DMA's right to free speach. The DMA violates my right not to listen.
50 million people signed up for this list. Which is not the same as eliminating 50 million people who would never buy from the DMA's clients from their pool of numbers. I'm on the list. I would never buy anything pitched to me through unsolicted phone or e-mail contact. I am not who the DMA is afraid of losing.
The DMA is afrain of losing the people who are too timid to say no the telemarketers. Grandma just can't say no to the pushy TM on the phone, but she can call up the FTC (or is the FCC?) and get her off the list. It's the people, the people who don't want stuff but CAN'T SAY NO when asked to buy it that the DMA is terrified of losing.
Joel.
There are almost 1 million people employed in the telemarketing industry. It's too bad that people didn't think about how many people this do not call list will put on the street. And many of these people are telemarketers because it's a better gig than welfare.
-- $G
...to fuck off.
Immediately.
In Soviet Russia, the CLUSTER Boewulfs YOU!
The only tele-marketer calls I am getting these days are from the local phone company trying to get me to switch to them for Long distance. Been that way for over a year now.
I also went to the trouble of removing myself from 6 of the biggest online phone directories. That might have contributed as well.
Think what you might, but if I only get 4 or 5 calls a YEAR, I say it is working.
Congress passes a law directing the FTC to do something, yet somehow the FTC lacks the authority to implement a law??? Did this guy leave SCO's legal department in order to plant his butt on the bench?
And how in the name of jehosephat is it a "Free Speech" infringement to tell a company it may not solicit you via your telephone? They're welcome to install a telephone in my residence with my permission (for which they'll dearly pay) and they can solicit me on their own phone all they want. Telemarketing is THEFT of your property, and the last time I checked, the First Amendment never authorized people to break into your house at 3sm for the purpose of trying to sell you something.
Likewise, I fail to see the constitutional argument that the possible loss of jobs by telemarketers is a compelling state interest under the constitution. If this held any water at all, we wouldn't be pursuing child pornogaphers out of fear of economic loss to the smut industry. Now would we be restricting commerce in moonshine, machineguns or cannabis.
I'm all for using this judge's interpretation of "Free Speech" to drive his clerk and his staff up the wall by ringing his telphone off the hook. The last thing we want to do is insulate this moron from the consequences of his hallucinatory legal reasoning.
Last I heard, federal laws trump state courts. It'll interesting to see how this works out. Where were the state courts when shitty federal laws like patriot act were passed?
Call the Direct Marketing Association
1-800-969-6566
Ask for membership info, and you get voicmail.
I set down the handset for 15 minutes and it is still on!!!
Where is my life, oh well, I'll get another.
And it rendered on, until the end of its days.
I find the telepanhandlers way more annoying than the people who actually want to sell me something-- I don't see why the "speech" of charities is somehow more worthwhile than the speech of corporations.
From what I've heard (that is to say, take this with a modest grain of salt) most of the money goes to the telemarketer when they are representing charities. If this is true then I have to ask, is this really charity? Or are you just paying someone to call up and annoy you?
Maybe if legeslation is passed authorizing the FTC to go through with this later they can add a provision that the majority of the money collected has to go to the actual charity in order for it to be considered a not-for-profit call.
One of the companies that brought the very compaint we are discussing has a big section on doing telemarketing for charities.
And not just telemarketers, but with a lot of charities the majority of the money goes to pay canvesers, to say nothing of CEOs of charities who get payed Millions of dollars. There are some good charities but you've got to be skeptical about how they are spending the money you give them.
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
"...those people were actually the ones most likely to buy."
What about a sign that says "Soliciters will be shot on sight."
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
The article says 50 million phone numbers. You could probably assume a lot of those numbers are for a single household of more than one person. So the actual number of people is probably well over 50 million, maybe like 75+ million (just a guesstimate).
Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
The telemarketer's customer has expectations, and they can close the contract or whatever if it isn't satisfied. The telemarketing company has to obey labor laws on the other hand. Maybe they pay minimum wage with commissions for sales.
Can someone with experience elaborate on this?
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
Usually, I can tell that it's an Automated Call Distribution system by the two seconds of silence and the sounds of switches clicking and hang up. Occasionally, I'll get caught off-guard and wind up talking to somebody who's asking for "Mr. ." When that happens, I'll ask them politely if they can hold on for a second, put the receiver down on the table and go back to doing whatever. The next trip to the fridge, I'll hang the phone up.
Nah, just call from your mobile. They aren't allowed to telemarket to those.
Yeah, Good luck with that. GNC (General Nutrition Centers) got my cell phone number on their list. I get a recorded call around the first of the month, on a weekday during business hours, telling me they've got a sale. I've talked to the local GNC manager on three separate occasions as well as the national GNC customer support line to remove my # from their list, but the calls continue. I've forwarded my complaints to the local BBB and the FTC.
You want a sig? I can get you a sig... Hell, I can get you a sig by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish.
I think there's a problem here. Haven't they already been supplied with this list? Now they can legally use it to solicit people.
-=- Many seek good nights and lose good days.
That appointed judge has that job for the rest of his life if he wants it. He doesn't need to do *anybody* any favors.
And if you think an elected judge, who has to pay for an election campaign every few years, is less likely to be influenced by big business, you either need to stop using illegal drugs, or start using legal ones. Go to south Texas and ask anyone there what they think of elected judges. Candidates spend a lot of money trying to get elected judge, because it's an easy way to get rich.
BTW, how many people do you think would actually pay attention to who they vote for in an Oklahoma judge election? He'd get re-elected just from the votes from the people who work in the telemarketing industry.
If elected officials are so subservient to the will of the people, why did it take so long to get a national do-not-call list? Why are there no decent laws against spam? Why do the laws allow the RIAA to run roughshod over people? The lawmakers are elected, aren't they?
In other news today, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Lee R. West's phone melted into a molten ball of plastic early this evening after 50 million angry US citizens all called his home at dinnertime today.
By the time the phone was disposed of, the briscut was burnt, the mashed potatos were cold, and the kids had sprayed purple ketchup on the carpet.
A scientist called in to examine the phone only had one comment for reporters.
"Well, I called twice."
For all of us at News 13, ain't karma a bitch? Good nite.
This should tell you idiots something...if 50 million people sign up to have their phone numbers put on a list so they don't receive those annoying calls all the time, maybe it means WE DON'T WANT YOU CALLING ALL THE TIME!! I don't give a crap if you have a "right" to do business in this way, people are sick of getting phone calls in the evenings while they are having dinner or just trying to enjoy a relaxing evening at home. If some stupid judge decides otherwise, then call during the daytime and leave a message with a phone number that we can call you back if we decide we want your product or service. I'd much prefer to just delete the message from my answering machine then sit there and say "NO THANKS" 50 f'ing times while the person on the other end spews off some scripted sales pitch in broken english and just doesn't get it when I say "NO". And one more thing... If you're going to have some computer dial my number, you'd better damn make sure that somebody is there if I answer. The most anoying thing is getting up to answer the phone only to be hung up on by some stupid auto-dialer. Go to hell you Telemarketer A**holes
Just when you thought the government was under control, now you gotta round up the local militia to stop a court from stopping a law.
Karma: Good, or bust!
Yes, you read it right, the poster compared getting unwanted phone cally to genocide and human enslavement.Next , he'll be explianing why people who don't buy things from telemarkters are as bad a Nazis.
Will the poster relizes that society is made up of people? will he relize the society, by its definition, is what the people make it to be? will he relizes that society can not be wrong in and of itself, but can only be looked upon from other societies(including future generations of that society) and considered wrong?
Stay tuned.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
We appoint judges here to help them maintain some independence. That allows them to protect individual rights, which often are under assault by majoritarian impulses. It also allows them to call fouls when the majority does not adhere to the rules. The second is what the judge thought he was doing.
The judge thought he was holding the FTC to the limits of the power it had been given. Congress said to go out and put together a list, and gave money to make the list. He said it did not empower them specifically do do what they were doing with the list. (I think he got it wrong, but that's what they make Courts of Appeal for.)
As much as people here like the indecency act that got passed being struck down by the Supreme Court, or want the DMCA to be struck down by courts, or like it when courts do not shut down sucks site domain names, you get to whining pretty quickly when a judge shows some independence. So, the reaction of many is to try to intimidate or punish the judge (or more likely his poor clerk) with crank phone calls.
Why wait for a Court of Appeal to take 6 months to sort it out when a short, specific bill retroactively authorizing the regulations in question would take no time to pass? Don't call the judge, call your congressman to fix it NOW.
It is better to call your elected politician. Judges are not there to listen to the majority, or be cowed by a phone call campaign. They are there to try to apply the law as best they can. It's fine to be angry. I'm ticked myself. But don't be a weenie.
The First Amendment of the US Constitution clearly states:
1. Congress shall make no law that interferes with a successful business model.
2. Congress shall have the power, notwithstanding any other provisions within this Constitution or its several Amendments, to preserve all successful business models by whatever means necessary.
3. The rights and interests of businesses shall not be infringed. America recognizes that human rights stem from corporate freedom.
4. Taxation shall not be considered a violation of a business's rights or interests.
5. Involuntary, unpaid slavery shall not be considered a business model for purposes of this Amendment.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
The reason the Direct Marketing Association sought this injunction was to prevent the FTC from offering its mandatory Do_Not_Call registry service for free. This would effectively halt DMA's alternative where they charge consumers $5 apiece to put telephone numbers on an "opt out" list which their member firms are under no legal obligation to consult.
God forbid that a cash cow like this should become an endangered species!
You do, of course, realize that for some people having 5000 fists shoved up their asses could be a real turn on. (Well, if done with any technique, that is.)
Honestly, now ... my time is too valuable to waste playing a song and dance with a telemarketer. Instead, when a telemarketer calls, I ask them to hold for just a moment while I get the decission-maker of the household on the phone. My 5 year old daughter just loves to talk to them about her Barbi collection, the pony she wants, her new shoes ....
Ft Sill is Oklahoma like Edwards AFB is California.
What makes a good spot for a base doesn't make for a great place to live--the requirements are different. [NB. Port cities are a special case. That's why I chose an AFB for the CA comparison.]
OK is also quite varied in geography and culture. Lawton is a military town, and has the same (lack of) interesting features that other such towns have. While I freely admit that the western half of the state is a desolate place, semi-arid climates do appeal to some people.
The eastern portion of the state has rolling hills covered with black jack oak, maple, elm and walnut. Every square inch of bare dirt quickly grows something (though often not what you want) leaving the entire place green during the spring and early summer. In the north central portion of the state you can find some of the only remaining tallgrass prairie.
There are many lakes, rivers and streams in the state. In fact, Oklahoma has more miles of shoreline than any other state in the union, and it's all fresh water. Keystone is turning into a mud puddle but Grand Lake is simply beautiful.
Because of it's mid-continent location, OK has a climate with distinct seasons. In the spring, there are dramatic and beautiful storms which appear and vanish quite suddenly. Summer is hot and often dry, but not as oppressive as it is further south. As a kid, it's a great excuse to go swimming every single day. Winter is cold and wet, but not as long or dark as in the north east. It's nice to have six inches of new snow to play in, but it's also nice not to have to deal with that same snow three months later. The same storms that bring rain in the spring bring ice storms in the winter, coating everything in sight with a layer of crystal clear ice that refracts the sunlight with dazzling brilliance. Fall brings cool weather and colors dotted with green to the forest.
If you love the change of the seasons, Oklahoma is a great place to live.
The people are friendly. That can be disconcerting if you are used to having strangers pretend that you don't exist, but it's nice to be able to have a decent, civil conversation with someone you've just met.
Oklahoma is also a good place to study. Cheap living for students, and there is no better place in the world to study geophysics, meteorology or veterinary medicine. If you want to study electrical engineering, you shouldn't pass up a chance at MIT of course, but for some fields it's the place to be.
Now for the reasons NOT to live there.
That lovely green part of the state is hell if you have allergies. More plants means more pollen. What is a minor problem in Sunnyvale, CA becomes debilitating in Tulsa, OK. Living somewhere you can't breathe is no fun at all.
The economy in Oklahoma has been in a steady decline since the 1970s, with a brief improvement around '83 or so. The population is shrinking in the small towns, which are full of empty buildings and homes. Most young people who go into professional fields wind up leaving the state for the east or west coast, taking much of the vitality and fun out of the area.
There might be other reasons, but this is why I left for Boston. A few years later, I wound up in Silicon Valley, and I have no plans to return to OK anytime soon--even with the slump there are more tech jobs here.
Oh, and by-the-way: Tornados aren't as dangerous as you think--they don't cover much area (unlike a hurricane) and your can see them coming (unlike an earthquake). Actually, they are quite interesting to watch if you get the chance, esp. if they touch down on a lake. If you tell a bunch of okies that a tornado is comming, chances are that they'll all go outside and look for it rather than hiding under the dining room table.
Okay I need some legal help here; why can't we make this case:
1) Corporations ARE NOT citizens. Corporations are distinct legal entities created by an act of Congress with the explicit intent of protecting the conspirators behind the "corporate veil" from ever possibly being held accountable for their actions.
2) As corporations are seperate and distinct legal entities from their owners the civil rights granted to corporate owners do NOT inherently transfer to the corporation {aka corporations may not vote}.
3) As the rights granted to corporate owners do NOT inherently transfer to corporations, the constitutionally guaranteed right of free speech does NOT transfer from a corporate owner to its corporation. {aka the CEO may call me incessantly as an individual but the corporation, and all employees acting on behalf of the corporation, do NOT have the right to call me incessantly}
4) As corporations have been acting unconstitutionally all of this time they must cease and disist immedaiately AND they must pay us all compensation for the unwarranted abuse that we have suffered to date.
So how come we can't make this case?
--Richard
Imagine, if you will, that someone starts using a laser to project ads on the windows on your house
Sell him a 20-line voicemail system to make them able to answer all those calls.
Also, I have some indemnification to sell him. You may enter into it as a franchise. I only demand a percentage.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
We wonder how the Oklahoma Judge will answer the 50 million phone calls in response to his decision. HUMMMMM!
Ah - that phone numer is the President of the USA - it's the President of the Direct Marketing Assoc. Pissing on them can be fun
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
Honorable Lee R. West
U S District Judge OFC
200 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, OK 73102
(405) 231-5355
When asked to provide a telephone number at online registrations or miscellaneous applications use the one above - after all it is public information. Don't forget to gladly offer it to telemarketers too.
See how long it takes the judge to wake up.
This topic seams to have racked up quite a response. Any slashdot staff care to provide some ranking compared to other popular topics?
Call his phone number and try really hard to sell him some bogus product (say, frozen pig butts, submarine mobile phones, bargain sale of used socks (hey, maybe he's got a foot-retish) etc.).
Sigged!
Its about time folks started running this country OF the people, For the people, *BY* the people.. Big business has lied, manipulated, extorted, coerced, 'spun' and defrauded, WITH the implicit consent of what passes for a representative government SO LONG that it's just 'business as usual' , Nothing can be done, 'what'dya expect from lawyers and politicians' as a response. Good People, you are getting the political treatment you have accepted.. might not be what you deserve, but it sure as HELL is what you've led the thieves in office to believe they can (and have, and expect to continue) get away with. IF you really don't like it, FIX IT.
The judge should follow the law himself. Congress meant for the FTC to run this, had that intention in mind when they wrote it, have restated that today, and have also stated that they will rewrite a new bill that restates it in smaller words so even dumbass Oklahoma judges can understand it.
Only on
Acording to a quick google, I found this about the 2000 presidential election-
Al Gore with 50.16 million votes, Republican candidate George W. Bush with 49.82 million votes
So what this means is that as many people want to not behassled by telemarketers as voted for either Presidential candidate.
If the FCC can't make that happen, then someone needs to make it happen, and quickly. The people have spoken. I don't give a damn who's department it falls under, but make it happen now.
Carpe Deez
This was in a federal court, located in Oklahoma. They aren't all in Washington DC.
No shit, peanut brain. I think that the parent was pretty clear about the difference. You didn't even read the post, did you?
The Direct Marketing Association
http://www.the-dma.org
Headquarters
1120 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6700
Telephone: 212.768.7277
Fax: 212.302.6714
Washington D. C. Office
1111 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-3603
Telephone: 202.955.5030
Fax: 202.955.0085
Every month I will get a new phone number and sell it to the thousands of marketing companies needing someone to call.
WooHooo! Sit back and watch the money come in.
Then call that person at home. After all, they wanted to call you, so you should assume they want to talk to you. Don't harrass them, just chat. Tell a few jokes, or if you can't think of any good jokes, put the phone in front of a tv running the comedy channel. Maybe publish their email on the usenet BBW group or something.
Actually, I've never called any of these folks at home - but they all seem to be very, very unhappy at the idea that I want all that information.
You can view the contact info for the "Honorable" Lee R. West, who made this decision, at the following URL:
.S. Courthouse
http://www.okwd.uscourts.gov/west.htm
Here are the numbers:
The Honorable Lee R. West
Senior United States District Judge
Western District of Oklahoma
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140
Chambers Facsimile: 405-609-5151
Chambers Staff:
Wilma Administrative Assistant 405-609-5140
Beverly Courtroom Deputy - Case Manager 405-609-5142
Tim Court Reporter 405-609-5163
Hope the Judges phone number gets out so everyone can call the judge and express their free speech to him all evening long, night after night.
I called the home number at 8:41 pm PST. Almost midnight his time. Do I feel bad? Naw. He had something like 30 or 40 "beeps" after his outgoing message, indicating that that many people had called his home number. Let's keep the calls coming!!!
It's about time for government for the people, by the people.
NOT for the judges, by the judges.
http://news.findlaw.com/usatoday/docs/ftc/donotcal l92303ord.pdf
You should take time to read the order and learn about the issues involved.
Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
Thanks for the information, a small correction, the site is: donotcall.gov (not .org)
asking, "so what part of NO don't you understand, so we can get a new bill in tomorrow?" FTC will appeal, hopefully a court with a clue will tell the good ol' boy just how the cows eat the cabbage in a few days.
u mn ists/dave_barry/6649728.htm
meanwhile, Dave Barry should get his second Pulitzer Prize for his column (syndicated through Knight-Ridder from the Miami Herald) printing the 800 number of the American Telemarketers Association... and forcing them to stop answering the phone. just who makes those nominations, anyway? just asking, because 50 million Americans want to know.....
oh, the link.... it's
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/col
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
or, maybe I can find it at http://www.law-out-of-my-ass.com/ ?
Accusing a judge of being "bought off" is a very serious thing. Your first post was an outright accusation, but this one is toned down allowing for the possibility of being a 'dumbass'. While the actual course of action varies based on the area, accepting money or services from a pending case is a serious ethics violation covered by federal and state laws. If there is enough evidence that a judge might have been "bought off", they are immediately impeached and placed on suspension, no questions asked. Both laywers and judges (who are former-lawyers) are subject to federal ethics rules, the ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, the ABA Rules of Professional Conduct, separate state codes of ethics, and in many states, ethics rules written into state statutes. When a judge commits an ethics violation it makes national news.
When a judge is convicted of a minor crime, potentially hundreds of cases are evaluated to see if the judge may have been biased. When a judge is convicted of major ethics violations (like bribery) there are thousands of cases that get reviewed.
If you have evidence that something this judge or any other has been "bought off", bring it forward; If you don't have evidence but are just angry, then shut up and quit spreading libel. That is a very serious accusation.
Now, moving on to the FACTS of this case:
First, it was two separate laws, not one. Second, they did not have that in the purposes of the 1991 law, but did have parts of it in the purposes of the 1994 law. Third, congress has authorized several specific powers in the acts. Go read them yourself. I did.
Just because congress indended a law to do something, the judges are to do what is actually codified in the text of the law. Judges are to evaluate two sources of data: the codified law and the facts presented, and then make a judgement based on their view of those facts. There are two separate laws here, one in 1991 and one in 1994, and both available in Cornell's law library (sorry, I didn't keep the links from earlier today.)
Now that I have had the chance to READ THE LAWS at Cornell's online law library, I agree with the judge. They have in fact been granted -- as far as the DNC list is concerned -- two separate powers. It doesn't matter what the intent was, the coded law lists two different powers. The DNC list as a ban mixes the two powers in a way not permitted by the law. Since this is something that congress, the public, and even the judge said is something that is generally good (although technically not legal) it would be trivial for Congress to pass a simple, 1 or 2 page bill authorizing the DNC list ban.
frob
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
[Answering a telemarketer's phone call.]
Seinfeld: I'm sorry, I'm a little tied up now. Give me your home number and I'll call you back later... oh, you don't like being called at home? Well, now you know how I feel.
[hangs up]
IANAL, but I'd think since they're liable if told not to call, that using the list in such a manner would be grounds for a class action suit against them, since we had to "sign" the list, if they use it, it should be grounds for a harrassment charge.
It might be dificult to prove that they didn't stumble upon your number instead of geting it off the list though. OTOH, why add a bunch of numbers to your lists that will probably return under 1% results, and increase turnover.
Unless you want to get nasty. Ask to talk to a supervisor, it takes time and money to train them, regular employees are a dime a dozen, it has the advantage of costing the TM money, scaring the employee (at least if they're new,) and aggravating the supervisor:)
Oh, the irony. What about the Williams Tower, which is a near exact replica of one of the World Trade towers. It was even designed by the same architect, Minoru Yamasaki.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
Ask to talk to a supervisor, it takes time and money to train them, regular employees are a dime a dozen, it has the advantage of costing the TM money, scaring the employee (at least if they're new,) and aggravating the supervisor:)
Yes. I really did not even need to sign up for the new list. It has been 2 years since I got a single telemarketing call. For a couple of years I used the "Anti-telemarketing Script" from the excellent Junkbusters website. It actually made dealing with telemarketers fun.
I recorded the date and time at the top of each form. Then asked the *long* list of questions. At the slightest bobble (usually when I insisted they add *all 3* of my phone numbers to their "do not call" list - which they didn't know how to do since they just had a check mark on the computer screen for the one number they had called -) I would ask for the supervisor and put them through the whole thing again. If they answered any of the questions incorrectly, I would read to them from the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
I filed every form in a folder I kept by the phone which also had lots of blank copies of the form. When a certain long distance telephone company continued to call me for 18 months after I asked to be put on their "do not call" list, I wrote my congressman, and eventually he urged me to file a formal complaint with both the FTC and the FCC." I sent every piece of documentation, including all the times I had asked to have a copy of their do not call policy sent to me, which they are required by law to do if requested, and which they had *never* done.
Turns out, they take the feds seriously! After that, I think I got put on a very special list which they must share with one another - the "Consumer Bitch from Hell" list. Never got another telemarketing call (except local businesses) from that day to this.
computerlady - a brand new Slash-daughter - alone, but no longer invisible, in the
Here's how to treat phone spamming.
:)
[PhoneSpammer]: "Hello, is (insert name) there?"
[Me]: "Sure, who's calling."
[PhoneSpammer]: "Oh, just some phone spamming company you've never heard of."
[Me]: "Ok then, just a sec."
Then I put the handset on the table (I don't hang up) and go back to my whatever. I often wonder just how long they will wait before realizing that nobody is going to pick up the phone. Thanks to the proliferation of spamming, I get to do it every day
I thought we were based on that whole "for the people, by the people" and "majority rules" democracy and stuff. I guess not. One man ruled in favor of 4 companies against 50 million citizens. Ummm... I think the people have spoken here. That must be the problem with the math they are teaching my daughter in school today. They taught me 1+4=5. But this judge thinks that 1+4>50,000,000. Man, I was a math whiz and I don't get that! Just another judge saying that a companies rights supercedes the individual citizens rights (actually 50 million individuals rights). This reminds me of the recent DeCSS case where the judge ruled that the companies' right to trade secret outweighed the individuals right to free speech. Look out ladies and gentleman! Wal Mart next quarterly is more important than the Bill of Rights.
now i've got coffee all my keyboard!
How about a *86 service. When I receive a telemarketing call, I push *86. The caller receives a message like this: "You are requesting that the owner of this telephone number purchase a service or product. If you wish to proceed with this call, you must agree to pay one dollar per minute for the privilege of this conversation. To proceed, and accept this charge, which will be automatically added to your phone bill, please press 1. To end this call, press 2." The telco can take a small percentage of the dollar to pay for the service and the rest is credited to my phone bill. Now when a telemarketer calls, he's paying for my time to talk with me on the phone.
and thank him, here's his phone number. Judge Lee R. West 405-348-0810. Maybe they'll be considerate and not call him during dinner...
All you telemarketers owe the judge a big thank you for his decision. Please call him and show your appreciation for his keen judicial insight. (Of course, as always be considerate and don't bother him at dinner). Sincerely, The DMA
Congress is angry about this. It's unheard of for a bill to go from drafting to signing in a day. It took longer to declare war after Pearl Harbor.
It's in there, trust me, you just have to read between the lines.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
The same day this decision came out, I saw Mr. T advertising a Telezapper-knockoff called the T-Blocker, mentioning that he "pities the fools" who think the DNC will work, since it has so many loopholes.
As for me, I'll pass: SIT tones on the outgoing message, anonymous call rejection, and knowing that it's an impossible to make an outbound call from a WATS (800,888,877,866,855,etc) number works just fine for me. Oh, and "area code 123?" Please.
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
American Teleservices Association
Administrative Office:
3815 River Crossing Parkway, Suite 20
Indianapolis, IN 46240
Phone: (317) 816-9336
info@ataconnect.org
Fax: (317) 218-0323
ATA Media Contact:
Dave Schemelia at (212) 981-5123.
ATA Executive Director:
Tim Searcy, (317) 823-8462, 8645 Admirals Woods Dr, Indianapolis, IN 46236
Counsel for American
Teleservices Association:
Robert Corn-Revere
Ronald G. London
Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP
1500 K Street, N.W., Suite 450
Washington, D.C. 20005-1272
(202) 508-6600
Corn-Revere Robert Lawyer
555 13th Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20004
202-637-5640
London Ronald G
1900 K Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20006
202-955-1638
The real reason this is held up in court is because they say that if you opt out then that precludes EVERYONE including charities, and politicians from calling you as well. Not to mention CNN surveys etc, so nobody is telling you that. The real reason this is held up is not because people are saying it's their right to call you, willy nilly, it's because they are saying that if politicians are allowed to, so should everyone else be.
Speak for yourself.
Fully cognizant that it was antimajoritarian, the Constitutional Congress, after fairly extensive debate, adopted the bill of rights, which was ratified and made part of our organic document.
The fundamental premise of the bill of rights is precisely this: 50 million people CAN be wrong. The majority rules in virtually every area of our life, but cannot overreach into the protected areas set forth in the bill of rights. That requires a special supermajority of both houses and ratification of 3/5 of the states. Nothing less will do.
While a reasonable person may dispute whether this federal District Court Judge was correct, it is now for the Judiciary, particularly because they are appointed for life and not subject to the political whims of 50 million people who will make that call. There are stopgaps behind stopgaps. If one judge is wrong, a panel of three Circuit judges can correct it. If they are wrong, an en banc panel of the Circuit Court might correct it. And if they are wrong, and it matters, the Supreme Court can reach and give final breath into the result.
And if you don't like that, you will need a whole lot more than 50 million people, but certainly, you might try, to get a constitutional amendment passed.
I have no problem with your thinking that the Judge is wrong -- I haven't looked at the opinion yet, but the reports I have seen don't seem right to me either. Just don't pretend that there is anything unamerican or inappropriate about what this judge did.
Indeed, what the Judge did in this case is distinctly and clearly American -- exercise a special stopgap to keep a mob from controlling American free speech. Right or wrong from issue to issue, the founders got it right as a structure for organizing society. Majority rules, except where they shouldn't. Damned brilliant idea.
federal judges are appointed for life. It has upsides and downsides, but guts come from not being accountable to the whims of the majority. Our founders were brilliant to recognize this -- true visionaries.
For a truly amusing take on this, check out this tune from the Travis County Bar Association.