429,000 Do-Not-Call Complaints

The Ghetto Imp writes "Is the do-not-call list working for you? According to CNN Money, there have been over 429,000 complaints filed with the FTC over do-not-call violations. The list is incredibly popular, with apparently some 62 million numbers registered. Apparently the worst offenders are the Credit Foundation of America, and our friends at AT&T. In an era where companies use computers to spam pre-recorded messages through our phone lines, does the FTC have the teeth to make unsolicited calls a thing of the past? At $11,000 per violation, let's hope so!"

Comments

ouch

[austad]

At $11k per violation, assuming all of those are legit, that's over $4 billion in fines. Hopefully they stick it to 'em.

$4,719,000,000 in fines?

[Dr. Bent]

OK, assuming for a moment that each of those complaints in a violation (which I know is a grand overestimation, but stay with me for a second), that makes almost 5 Billion dollars in fines. Where is this money going? Surely the FTC doesn't need 5 billion dollars (or even 1/10th of that) to run the Do-Not-Call list!

I tell you where it should be going: To the people who filed the complaints. If your complaint was valid...you were illegally called even though you were on the DNC list...you shoulc get a percentage of the fine. Otherwise this money just gets tossed into the great financial landfill that is the U.S. Government, and gets used for some god-only-knows pork barrel project that has nothing to do with telemarketing and consumer privacy.

Re:$4,719,000,000 in fines?

[dirvish]

Up to $11,000 per incident. Surely violators will make more than one illegal call and FTC will settle for a smaller amount per incident.

Re:$4,719,000,000 in fines?

[Phillyboy82]

I do not think this would be a very good idea. This would give people an incentive to call on a whim for EVERY marketing call that they would receive in hopes of getting a chunk of the FTC fine pie. Even if the call originates from legitimate places like non-profit agencies, or for an example a utility company they do business with that is calling for a contract renewal, greedy ass people will STILL phone them as illegitimate spam calls for that chance to get their 'honest cut' of the fine. This also in turn will heap crap onto the pile of legitimate complaints that are filed, thus slowing down the process of punishement for the FTC to actually fine companies that are doing wrong.

The key to avoid phone spam

[flappinbooger]

Is to just not have a landline phone.

I have had *only* a cell phone for me and one for my wife for the last year, and it's worked great. We always have a phone with us when we need it, and I haven't had any solicitation calls. Oh, and for internet we use cable.

Re:The key to avoid phone spam

[weslocke]

My problem is that I have a Sprint PCS phone with text messaging, email, etc.

And lately I've begun getting damned spam on the thing. Here's an address that has never been given out to anyone, so it's even more annoying.

Personally I think it's the most annoying thing since they started putting regular commercials mixed in with previews at the theaters. (After all a TV commercial I can understand. That's how they pay their bills. But I just forked over $10 to see a flick, and they're still subjecting me to a freaking Coke commercial?!) /bugger

The law will have bearing.

[www.sorehands.com]

Even if they move to India, they still are subject to the law if they are calling into the USA -- though it would be harder to enforce.

Generally, they would be doing the telemarking for a company in the USA which would then have liability.

One thing that I found, is that if you ask for their telephone number they will either hang-up on you or tell you they don't have one.

Re:An inside perspective.

[gcaseye6677]

Cry me a river. I think its great that the law makes things very difficult for telemarketers. Now we can kill off the few that remain. This is an industry that caused its own death due to relentless abuse of the public. Had they made a good faith effort to not call people who requested to not be called, these regulations would not have been necessary.

Oh, grow up.

[rjstanford]

Shame? Hey, here's a newsflash - I was a developer. I was given a set of fairly challenging requirements (respose time, interfacing to a Rockwall predictive dialer, agent ease of use, updatability, etc) and some interesting hardware (Data General boxen running Informix Online v6 of all things).

You know what? I did my job. Which I was happy to have, and to be able to do. Which wasn't even the point of my post, which was pointing out that even back them ('92) you could get your number scrubbed from the lists of the ethical telemarketers). You want to crusade against people using the phone, be my guest. But no, I feel no shame for writing solid code for a legitimate business. Some of it was still being used years later, which I happen ti think was pretty cool. I guess that makes me that much worse, huh.

Re:AT&T

[thedillybar]

>Telemarketers are in the same category of living scum as spammers.

Ummm...except what they're doing is legal and traceable. It's a much different category and needs to be treated as such.

Re:loophole

[doublem]

The question is, did you TELL AAA that is why you canceled?

Re:Didn't need a "Do Not Call List"

[jfengel]

I had heard that you had to say "put me on your do not call list"; merely "take me off our list" took you off that list but didn't prevent them from calling via a "different" list. That may be what a sibling post was getting it.

I dunno if it's true or not; I probably got it off the internet and that's a pretty unreliable source. But I had also found that "take me off your list" dramatically reduced telemarketing calls even before the do-not-call list (which has cut them to almost nil.)

bust them anyways

[Anonymous Coward]

Sheesh, what do you have to lose? Who the fuck cares what happens to them?

How about something like "DTMF knocking"?

[bl8n8r]

This shit isn't going to go away. How long before I get just as much bullshit on my cell phone as I do in my Inbox?

"It would be cool to give people I know a 3 digit DTMF code or somethign to enter while the phone is ringing so I would know it's someone I know, and not some fucking telemarketer", He said, popping the back off his cell phone.....

Re:Working for me...

[surreal-maitland]

true, but, as the article says, only about 1 in 100 people call to complain. that brings the figures up to 42,900,000. no matter how stupid people are not to call, that's a much more significant number.

Re:too many loopholes

[ryanwright]

While I give to charities, it's annoying to have (literally) 10 to 15 different Police charities calling every month (among others).

This is why I don't give to charities.

I did once. Last Christmas, we put a bunch of goodies in a shoe box to send to a poor child in Africa. Gave it to a company that was collecting them along with a check to cover postage and such.

In the six months since, I've received half a dozen letters from them begging for more money. Forget it; I'm not doing it anymore. If I can't just donate from time to time without being harassed for the rest of me life then I won't donate at all.

My Police/Fire Charity Stratedgy

[swb]

[ring][ring]

Them: "Hi, I'm Tyrone, and I'm calling from the $Police_Fire_Charity. Did you know that $Police_Fire personnel are great guys and don't any benefits at all? How would you like to help?"

Me: "Well, Tyrone, I've already donated this year, three times so far and I plan to give again in the fall."

Them: "Mr. $Mispronounced_Lastname, you've been giving to one of those other charities. We represent the real $Policy_Fire_Charity -- how about helping us out with $20?"

Me: "No, no, I'm positive I've donated three times already. I even have the cancelled checks. Let's see here, this big one's made out to "Hennepin County", the other to "Minnesota Revenue Service" and the third and largest to "Internal Revenue Service." I'm sure that all of those donations cover all the money I'm giving to law enforcement."

The rest boils down to an amusing argument with the high school dropout on the other end of the line about whose benefits are better, his (none), mine, or the cops. I'm actually pretty sure mine are better than both, but the cops around here sure get to retire on a nice pension before I do.