Slashdot Mirror
FCC Proposes Fining AT&T Over DNC Violation
Iphtashu Fitz writes "The FCC has just announced a proposed $780,000 fine against AT&T for violating the recently enacted Do Not Call telemarketing rules. The FCC charges that AT&T marketers called 29 consumers on 78 different occasions after those consumers had signed up on the Do Not Call list. The FCC has posted a press release (pdf) to this effect on their web site."
Personally, I support the DNC list - I hate being interrupted at all hours of day or night for solicitations. My motto? - If I want your product/service - I'll come to you to find out what you have to offer.
I say this is great because if AT&T gets fined, it shows that nobody's above the rules and will send a message to all the smaller telemarketers who might be tempted to ignore the DNC. It's nice to know that nobody, no matter how big or small, is above the rules.
On the other hand, as we all know, the DNC is hotly contested in court as possible free speech violations, among other things. I don't think the courts really care about the small telemarketer and their rights, but someone with the size, lobbying ability, and lawyer teams that AT&T has really could put up a good fight to the law.
It's a nice precedent to see AT&T fined for this, but I hope it doesn't backfire.
SEARCHING FOR SIG
SIG NOT FOUND ERROR
READY.
This is based on the rules that have long been in place that you can request that a company put you on their internal do not call list.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
Having a DNC list is great and all, but if you either can't or don't enforce it, it's worthless.
I'd say AT&T is testing their limits, seeing what they can get away with. If the FCC lets them go on this one, I suspect the DNC list will become pretty useless.
no comment
Of course, this just means that telemarketers will start using the well-known loopholes that allow the other 20% of calls to get through. I've already gotten several calls from "charities" and "fundraisers" that were actually trying to sell you something, ultimately, just not at that exact second.
Sneaky bastards, telemarketers are.
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
They were calling to sell me broadband access... but they made sure to preface their call with "you recently purchased a laptop from us". As this Do Not Call thing swings into use I forsee the value of knowing who companies sell their products to significantly more valuable than it's ever been. It used to be that only Radio Shack asked who you were ... get used to EVERYONE doing it ... because they'll be able to partner with other retailers and cross-sell products using that loophole in the Do-Not-Call law.
Why the hell is this "proposed"? It should just be - the law's in place, ATT is violating it, and they should pay the fine - end of story.
Jeezus, I'd love to have a "proposed" fine the next time I get a speeding ticket.
And actually, this being a civil rather than a criminal matter makes proving the case that much easier - instead of "Beyond a reasonable doubt", it has to be proven "By a preponderance of evidence".
To put that into perspective - OJ was found "Not Guilty" in a criminal court, because it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it. The civil court proceedings, however, found him guilty "By a preponderance of evidence". So, by one standard he's not guilty, by another he is guilty. At the end of the day, he killed 'em, but the case wasn't good enough to prosecute criminally.
For our purposes of the DNC list, I would think that this will make nailing the slime who try to weasel through the loopholes easier...we don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they're a weasel, we just have to show through a preponderance of evidence that they are a small, furry mammal of the Mustelid family, behaving in a weasel-like way.
The preceeding is noted as being gratuitously insulting to weasels, for which I apologize.
What in hell's name were they thinking? $780'000?
Please tell me how thats a deterrent to something like AT&T?
--- Egads, I glow in the dark!
1. Get a Caller ID Box. Your telco probably will charge you a fee for sending the information, since as they see it, you might decide not to answer the phone based on who is calling and therefore they will not earn the connection charge on the call. 2. Block Withheld Numbers if you live in a jurisdiction where withholding your number is still legal. Your telco probably will charge you for this, but it's worth it. {before I had mine blocked, I used to say to Number Withheld: "Are you a paedophile? Because your number is withheld." That saw them off. On my mobile, where there is no such service available, I have to resort to doing an impression of a recorded announcement: "Anonymous calls are not welcome on this line. If your business is important you may ring back without withholding your number. Goodbye." 3. Don't say anything if you don't recognise the caller's number. This spins them out, because they think it could be an answering machine. A legitimate caller will ask for you by name. A sleazeball telemarketer will just hang up. 4. Ask them how they got your number. This distracts them from the purpose of the call and maybe gets them into an infinite loop. 5. If all else fails, remember that it is your line, and you are under no obligation to be polite with unwanted callers. Any obligation of politeness would fall on the originator, not the recipient. I think the best solution would be for the do-not-call list to be in the phone directory, by placing a symbol next to the numbers of people who did not wish to receive unsolictited sales calls. I'm not so anti-social that I'd consider going ex-directory, because that would jeopardise things for people who might have a legitimate reason to call me {and because I like looking up my name in the new phone book every 18 months or so, it gives me a kick without harming anyone else}. Having the "do not call" list in the phone book itself would be almost foolproof. Everyone with a phone line gets the phone book, so there would be no shortage of witnesses to the fact that your number was on the list. The only downside is that you might have to wait till the new directory was published in order to get your name properly DNC'd. But the telemarketing companies could be made to subscribe to an update list as a condition of their operating licence.
"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
It has to come from some manager's budget... he definitely won't be getting a bonus.
Plus, they most likely did not get $780,000 in returns from those calls. A part of the business that is bleeding money, with no real anticipated return is likely to be cut off.
Umm, that is in the FIRST month of the DNC being enforced. I'm sure if AT&T wants to continue to pay $780,000 PER MONTH that they will continue their behavior. At nearly $10 Million / year, I do believe that's a deterrent. The LD market isn't that great anymore.
Come play Moral Decay!
Interestingly enough, I believe that att may actually not fight the fine. Fighting it would be a PR nightmare. How can they justify with public support the position that they have to call people who explcitely desire to not be called?
Fining att was a smart move by the fcc. If it was some scumbag telemarketing company that got fined they would probably care less what their PR appearance was.
love is just extroverted narcissism
The problem with fines is that they end up being looked at as the cost of doing business. We need more appropriate penalties for corporations. Corporate death penalty, anyone? What would be analogous to imprisonment for a publically-traded company?