Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC Proposes Fining AT&T Over DNC Violation

Posted by simoniker on from the delightful-implementation dept.

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."

6 of 392 comments (clear)

  1. Protect Personal Privacy! by dukeluke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Protect Personal Privacy! by jfengel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I mostly support you on this, but not quite completely. I am the owner of two small businesses, and a small business finds it very hard to get the word out about its existence. If you don't know it's out there, you won't go looking for it.

      Everybody knows AT&T, and as far as I'm concerned they should pay the maximum penalty plus an idiot tax for doing precisely what they've been told not to do. But I wish I could find a way to get in contact with the many people who would probably come see the plays that my theater troupe puts on if they only knew it existed.

      I'm not trying to claim that I'm going to try telemarketing for that; I wouldn't even if it would be cost-effective. I'm not even proposing that telemarketing should be allowed at all. It's an obvious violation of privacy, as well as being obnoxious, and if obnoxious is all you've got, give up. I'm just challenging one of your assumptions, that "I'll come to you to find out what you have to offer."

      For myself, I'll keep trying the old-fashioned way: putting on good theater and hoping that eventually positive word of mouth will bring people out to see it, and being grateful that I'm not expecting to make a living off of it.

      (And passing up the crass opportunity to get myself modded down by putting the URL for my theater group on Slashdot. Not that I won't get modded down anyway for explaining, if not excusing, some telemarketers.)

  2. This could be wonderful, but it could backfire by FreeBSD+Goddess · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  3. Not the "Do Not Call" list by monkeydo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is NOT about the federal "Do Not Call" list.

    The Commission found that AT&T apparently made telephone solicitation calls to 29
    consumers on 78 separate occasions after those consumers had requested that AT&T not call
    them again    . The Commission therefore concluded that AT&T had apparently violated the FCC's company-specific Do-Not-Call rule, section 64.1200(e) of the Commission?s rules.


    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
  4. I got a call from Dell yesterday... by telstar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:Good - let's get this tested right away by djh101010 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.