Slashdot Mirror
Appeals Court OKs FTC's Do-Not-Call List
GTRacer writes "The USA Today website just posted a report that the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (Denver) has upheld the FTC's national Do Not Call registry. In their decision, the Court found the list to be 'a valid commercial speech regulation...without burdening an excessive amount of speech.' The telemarketers had challenged the constitutionality of blocking commercial free speech while allowing charities and select others to continue phone solicitation. Interestingly enough, 'Officials in the telemarketing industry did not immediately return calls seeking comment.' Isn't it now obvious these people have a double-standard when it comes to reaching out and touching someone?" The court's decision is available to read.
I have always been annoyed at the telemarketing industry's arguments as to why they should be able to do this. They have always maintained that it was free speech. What they fail to realize is that it is free speech that I have to pay for! Sure, I would have a phone anyway, but basically they are wasting my money. If they want to market on the street corner, go right ahead because that truly is free speech (obviously within limits) but when you come into my home on the telephone line I am paying for, then it crosses the line and that is not free speech.
This leads me to another thought. I have always wondered why the telemarketing industry doesn't pay for people's phone lines in return for getting phone spam. ISP's do it, why not here?
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
What will be interesting to see is how fast the telemarketing firms find work-arounds.
"Hello? Yes, this is the United Way. We're calling to let you know that under arrangement with Company X a small donation allows us to offer you. . . "
KFG
My state's Do-Not-Call List has kept my phone blissfully silent for the last year or so. But the various DNC List laws have several loopholes. Perhaps the worst is the political campaign loophole. Worse yet, many of those campaigns are using automated responders which simply play a recording if you (or your answering machine) answers. Our primary is today, over the last three days I've gotten a half dozen unwelcome political calls and a dozen hung up calls that I can only guess are predictive dialers. For a phone that normally rings one a week this was a huge irritation. At least they haven't started calling my cell phone (yet).
Search 2010 Gen Con events
One example of this already:
In our local shopping mall there is a shiny new car parked in the walkway. Next to it is a box with a pile of "entry forms" on the top of it, enticing people to enter to win a new car, or a pile of cash or whatever.
When you read the fine print on the back of the card, you find that by filling out the card, you are giving them and anyone they feel like sharing it with permission to contact you via phone or mail.
I just wonder what would happen if someone filled out one of these for me (being on the Do Not Call list) without my knowledge or permission, and they contacted me. Hmm...
You probably shouldn't click this.
Don't think that the telemarketters don't know their own business.
As much as I am annoyed by telemarketing, spam and all sort of other unsolicited products/services, I am dubious about this. I'm all for the Do-not-call list, but in this case telemarketers do have a point. Why allow charities and not them? The only reason so few people are complaining (even here on /.) is that most people are annoyed by telemarketing. If this was about a more neutral service, there would be serious complaints.
A better approach would be a do-not-call list with options: 1 option for "do not call me at all", and another option with "do not call me, but still allow charities", or something in this matter. This would give power to individual consumer, and remove any validity from telemarketers complaints.
The purpose of life is to find the purpose of life.