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."
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?
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?
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...
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
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.
When did I say they were incapable of error? It was a short post and I can't find that statement or implication anywhere.
Let me phrase my post another way: What particular aspect(s) of the judge's decision do you think were incorrect? Feel free to be as specific as you like about his arguments, facts, etc.
Even if this decisions is upheld, it doesn't necessarily mean that a constitutional amendment is required. The ruling says that the FTC overstepped their bounds. Legislation passed by Congress might be perfectly acceptable.
Also, there's no reason to believe that the database will be available to the telemarketers. If shouldn't go active until the decision of its legality is made, and if it's not legal it should be destroyed.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
this legislation would not put 50 million out of work,
the telemarketing association puts the number somewhere between 1 and 2 million. 50 million vs 1 or 2 is not a difficult question to answer. If this went to the polls it would pass so easily it wouldn't even be an issue. I'm sorry if it puts that many people out of a job, but really the people have spoken, we are supposed to have a say in how we are governed and this judge overruling what certainly has a huge public mandate is egregious power grabbing.
Telemarketers are not allowed to call cellular phones.
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
The right decision?
How can FIFTY FREAKIN' MILLION votes for this thing be wrong?
"Gee, only 20% of the nation signed up for this. I guess we don't need it."
Give me a break.
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
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.
Yes, actually. This is not a simple do-not-call list, which reputable companies take pretty seriously. This is the government actively soliciting the names/numbers of people in order to prevent marketers from contacting them. Furthermore this list prevents marketers from contacting you ever, whereas the normal existing situation was that you would request that they not contact you again. Finally, this list places a burden on speech and is bound to create some difficult lawsuits, especially as to what constitutes an advertisment.
Forcing a company to obtain this list prior to making calls is a much different situation from requiring them to keep and honor a list of numbers they have called and been asked not to call again. The crux of the matter is the notion that advertising is not fully protected speech... which is fine. Regulate away. But to blatantly allow not-for-profit organizations to solicit donations while restricting for-profits from calling? Whatever.
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. Want to guess how many more calls I'll get after this list goes into full play from groups like the Nation Foundation or the ACLU Foundation? Can't wait to see which new foundations are founded just for the purpose of making it possible for companies to do "branded" mailings and callings under the cover of a non-profit. Even without a sales pitch, anything with a corporate logo on it could very well be considered "advertising" (witness the recent Nike lawsuit).
Of course I talk to very few telemarketers/telepanhandlers/bill-collectors anyway... I use caller ID and an answering machine to my benefit. Best of all, neither of the above can realistically be regulated into existence or arbitrarily wiped out of existence by a capricious Judiciary.
I do not have a signature
not only did Congress approve this, but 50 million Americans did, too.
:)
Tell that to Gore.
Come to think of it, what does it say that 105 million Americans voted in the last election, but 50 million households (representing, presumably, in the neighborhood of 100 million voting-age americans) registered for the DNC list?
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 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.
The same nice lady is just hanging up on people now. Hopefully they will need to change their number by the end of the week. Let's see, Congress and 50 million Americans VS. a pack of rude bastards with speed dialers and a clueless and/or corrupt judge. I think this needs to change.
In the meantime, Judge West really needs to put himself on Slashdot's do not contact list.
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!
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
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.
The National Registry is already available to telemarketers and has been for over a month.
Since Prior to the Judge's ruling telemarketers had to be in compliance by October 1st most telemarketers have already scrubbed their calls lists against the national registry. It'll be interesting to see if they unscrub them.
I do dev for a teleservice company. They are ecstatic today.
Jeff
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%)
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.
Getting the judge's office number is easy -- just call up the courthouse. But if you did call, you will probably just get a secratery that will say that the judge makes his rulings BASED ON THE LAW.
I don't know about you, but I've already written my congress-critters and referenced the court case, asking that if the case has any merit, they need to pass a law explicitly permitting the DNC ban.
frob
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
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
Here comes trouble... ;)
:)
Point 1) It's actually %100 of those that voted since there is no "Don't put me on the list," option. If there were such an option, how many people do you think would have voted to actually leave themselves open to telemarketers?
Point 2) I pulled %20 out of my butt. It has as much real signifigance as a SlashPoll.
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!
Gaaaaahhhh! Noooooooo! Were counting the days until this was going into effect! How the hell else do I get it across to these people that I do not want their encyclopedias, mortgages, credit cards, or what other crap they are pushing?!?
Short of rationalizing with these people and trying to get laws passed there isn't much else you can do with these people, spammers and telemarketers alike, other than physically remove them and their lunacy from the planet. It just comes down to how much you really hate them. Imagine if Fight Club's Tyler Durden had been all about taking down spammers and telemarketers.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Here is the decision the judge rendered. It seems an incredible reach to find that Congress did not authorize the FTC to create the Do-Not-Call list.
The Do-Not-Call Implementation Act does not authorize the FTC to create a Do-Not-Call database. It authorizes the FTC to collect fees to support the operation of the database.
The authorization to regulate telemarketing call (including creating a Do-Not-Call database) was explicitly given to the FCC in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act "TCPA" of 1991. The FTC was given authority to make rules concerning fraud, harrassment, and abuse in telemarketing By the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud Abuse and Prevention Act "TCFAP" of 1994. The authorization to create a Do-Not-Call registry was not part of the TCFAP.
So congress screwed up. The FCC has the authority. The FTC has the money. The FTC cannot usurp the power explicitly granted to the FCC, just because they feel like it. Neither can the FCC get the money from the FTC.
Congress needs to fix this, but it should be easily fixable, either by shifting the authority form the FCC to the FTC or by shift ing the money from the FTC to the FCC.
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?