Slashdot Mirror


FTC Announces Crackdown on Do Not Call Violators

Tech.Luver writes "The Federal Trade Commission today announced a law enforcement crackdown on companies and individuals accused of violating the requirements of the National Do Not Call Registry, resulting in six settlements collectively imposing nearly $7.7 million in civil penalties, along with an additional complaint that will be filed in federal district court. The actions, brought by the Department of Justice on the FTC's behalf, are against companies ranging from adjustable bed seller Craftmatic Industries, to alarm-monitoring provider ADT Security Services and lender Ameriquest Mortgage Company. To date, consumers have put more than 145 million numbers on the Registry, indicating they do not want to receive calls from telemarketers at home."

162 comments

  1. Yeah!!! by Jaster82 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe the took that complaint I lodged 3 years ago seriously... It's about time this type of thing started happening.

    1. Re:Yeah!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      OT... But how the hell did that post get modded redundant? It was completely on topic and was the first of it's type of expression... No first post trolling or trolling of any kind. So what gives? I only post AC because mod bombing is far to common a practice...

    2. Re:Yeah!!! by magarity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      3 years seems a little excessive. OTOH, they wait for enough people to complain about a given source to make a large case before they bother to chase after the offenders. There's this number that sources from Ohio that calls my cell (that I put on the do not call list) every couple of months with a recording trying to sell me insurance, timeshares, etc. I report it every time but they haven't been shut down yet. sigh

    3. Re:Yeah!!! by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Maybe the took that complaint I lodged 3 years ago seriously... It's about time this type of thing started happening. I thought this was heading in the right direction as well until I noticed I had missed the word "collectively".
      Also I was a bit disappointed at the lack of mention of thumbscrews.
      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    4. Re:Yeah!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what the FTC does with all of the money they rake in, from $18,000 dollar year subscription fees, fees to the consumer and then multimillion dollar law suit settlements. They're getting dough from all angles.

  2. 5 Year Limit by Misanthrope · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/10/dnctestimony.shtm
    Make sure you contact your congress critter about the permanency of the DNC list.
    Either that or just make sure to register again in 5 years.

    1. Re:5 Year Limit by Jaster82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thanks for the heads up! I'll have to actually write a good old fashioned snail mail letter to my senator here in Colorado... Stick it to 'em! Remember people, if you want to be taken seriously, snail mail is the only way to go.

    2. Re:5 Year Limit by Toutatis · · Score: 5, Funny

      There is no need to register again. Someone will call you to remember you are unregistered.

    3. Re:5 Year Limit by permaculture · · Score: 1

      They should change it to an opt-in list, rather than an opt-out list.

      --
      Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
    4. Re:5 Year Limit by goddidit · · Score: 5, Funny

      Remember people, if you want to be taken seriously, snail mail is the only way to go. I think that in this case it could be actually better to call them. Repeatedly.
      --
      This .sig is exactly 120 characters long.
    5. Re:5 Year Limit by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Prior restraint issues, among others, would appear. If companies were preemptively prevented from calling people, that amounts to a prior restraint without sufficient justification. However, with an opt-out list, companies are only prevented from calling those people who have explicitly requested such treatment. This way, the government hasn't restrained the companies a priori.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    6. Re:5 Year Limit by Foolicious · · Score: 1

      Remember people, if you want to be taken seriously, snail mail is the only way to go. No. Post-911, Anthrax scare, etc. the best option is ALWAYS to call or fax, especially for the federal government. If you snail mail, your letter sits in communication purgatory where it is treated as if it is filled with explosives or toxins. Once it's been cleared, it could be weeks.
      --
      Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
    7. Re:5 Year Limit by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Remember people, if you want to be taken seriously, snail mail is the only way to go. No. Post-911, Anthrax scare, etc. the best option is ALWAYS to call or fax, especially for the federal government. If you snail mail, your letter sits in communication purgatory where it is treated as if it is filled with explosives or toxins. Once it's been cleared, it could be weeks. I think GP's point was more in the direction of not using email if you want to be taken seriously.
    8. Re:5 Year Limit by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Make sure you also tell your congress critter to extend the DNC list to include congress critters and charities, as those were 90% of the problem ( and now thanks to the DNC list, are 100% minus iota of the problem).

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    9. Re:5 Year Limit by Optikschmoptik · · Score: 1

      Remember people, if you want to be taken seriously, snail mail is the only way to go.

      No, not anymore, unfortunately. Snail mail now just takes forever to get through because they have to process it all for hazardous materials after all the anthrax and white powder scares. The turnaround time is usually longer than Washington's attention span.

      Email and phone is the way to get the point across in any reasonable amount of time, or take them out to an expensive dinner.

    10. Re:5 Year Limit by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      Not true, I signed up the first or second day of the DNC being available, and found recently that my name was no longer registered.

    11. Re:5 Year Limit by vtscott · · Score: 1

      People change telephone numbers from time to time, so I think it would be unwise to permanently keep a number on any kind of list. I don't know why someone wouldn't want to be on the DNC list (unless they're just so lonely they enjoy having someone to talk to even if it's about long distance service). Since I won't keep my phone number forever, I think it's reasonable to spend a few seconds registering once every five years as long as I have the number. If the next guy wants to hear about the latest deals on timeshares, more power to him.

    12. Re:5 Year Limit by Z00L00K · · Score: 1
      Actually - there shouldn't be a "Do Not Call" list. There should be a "You May Call" list. And numbers not on that list may not be called for any purpose involving money.

      An idea I have is that the phone providers should offer a service that allows the called party to bill the caller for $100 by pressing a certain code during the call. That would probably be most effective.

      And if you run your own switch through Asterisk it's also possible to add functionality where the caller is directed to an automatic system that just gives them the ride of their life... Just go figure an angry Finnish woman barking at them, some clip from a porno movie, an answering machine that goes "Hello.... Hello? .... Hello?!... "... etc... Even better if it's random. The best thing is if the salesperson can be locked up for several minutes by an intelligent system that actually doesn't agree to anything, just asks them for more details all the time...

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    13. Re:5 Year Limit by Foolicious · · Score: 1

      I think GP's point was more in the direction of not using email if you want to be taken seriously. Fair enough. Although even that, I believe, is changing, though I can only speak anecdotally. The funny thing about squeaky wheels is that the politicians remember you. If you call and fax and mail a bunch of times, your email is then going to have a lot more validity in their minds that some random guy that emails once without every establishing any sort of sense of "identity" and rappoty with the politician and his staff.
      --
      Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
    14. Re:5 Year Limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prior restraint issues, among others, would appear. If companies were preemptively prevented from killing people, that amounts to a prior restraint without sufficient justification. However, with an opt-out list, companies are only prevented from killing those people who have explicitly requested such treatment. This way, the government hasn't restrained the companies a priori.

    15. Re:5 Year Limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ==TheJOKE==
      Empty Space -- *whoosh*
      =YOUR HEAD=

    16. Re:5 Year Limit by Four_One_Nine · · Score: 1

      The best reason I can think of to NOT be on the DNC list is so that you can use my Telecrapper 2000.

      --
      I did it for Johnny.
    17. Re:5 Year Limit by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Why would it be prior restraint? It's not the company's phone line they're using, they're not paying for it, why should they get any right to use that line without the owner's prior authorization?

    18. Re:5 Year Limit by operagost · · Score: 1

      An idea I have is that the phone providers should offer a service that allows the called party to bill the caller for $100 by pressing a certain code during the call.
      That would make it a lot easier for college students to borrow money from Dad.

      Dad: Hey son, just checking in on you to make sure...
      Student: *beep*
      Dad: Why you little...!

      On the other hand, now when I call one of my stupid vendors for support, they can auto-bill me for the privilege of waiting on hold.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    19. Re:5 Year Limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They only check snail mail for anthrax and other chemicals in DC.

      Send your snail mail to the state office.

    20. Re:5 Year Limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our community needs some peer review to make sure the bulk we're sending them makes sense.

    21. Re:5 Year Limit by Amouth · · Score: 1

      +! (perfect)

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    22. Re:5 Year Limit by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      (a) It is the company's line; what are you talking about?

      (b) It's prior restraint because that's the term we use when the government restrains speech before it occurs.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    23. Re:5 Year Limit by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      It is? I was under the impression that I was the one footing the bill for my phone line. Nice to know it's the telemarketers, I'm sure they'll have no problem paying up when I send them the bill for the last 5 years of payments I've been making for their phone line, right? ... right? ... thought so. No, it's my phone line after all, I guess, since they aren't paying for it.

      And telling them they can't use my phone line without authorization first isn't any sort of restraint on their speech. They can speak all they like... on their dime. The right to free speech does not include the right to make someone else pay for it.

    24. Re:5 Year Limit by ih8bills · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily true -- I communicate via email with my reps all the time... and actually get answers-- though maybe dictated ones

    25. Re:5 Year Limit by jwo7777777 · · Score: 1

      It all began with my building of "rappoty" with my politician. Next thing I knew, they were expecting to use my "rappoty" any time they came by my house.

  3. A paradise to scammers by vivaoporto · · Score: 1

    Just think about it: "If you think you have been affected, fill this form with your name, phone number and availability and we will gladly contact you with more information about ... "

  4. To File a Complaint by wildsurf · · Score: 4, Informative

    Go here.

    --
    Weeks of coding saves hours of planning.
    1. Re:To File a Complaint by garcia · · Score: 1

      And remember that it doesn't mean that anything will get done, especially Justice just for Girls likes to call repeatedly and then when you complain, claim that you put their number there or that someone else did.

      My other favorite are the automated carpet cleaning calls that you get, number unavailable, that don't leave their number, name or otherwise and I'm not sure what purpose they serve other than to annoy.

  5. Re:Slashdot by thefirelane · · Score: 2, Informative

    no doubt everyone's going to start moaning about how the government is yet AGAIN censoring the activities of upstanding all-american companies... aren't they?

    Hardly censorship, and if you are trying to point out some sort of hypocricy, you are on weak footing

    You might also note: companies are no allowed to drive around at 1am with a giant bullhorn aimed at homes, selling their products. CENSORSHIP!?!? No.

  6. Freedom by SamP2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The freedom of speech includes the freedom not to listen.

    1. Re:Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or to put it another way, the freedom of speech does not create a mandate for others to listen.

    2. Re:Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, what did you say? I wasn't listening.

  7. Re:Slashdot by dkf · · Score: 1

    You might also note: companies are no allowed to drive around at 1am with a giant bullhorn aimed at homes, selling their products. CENSORSHIP!?!? No. Round here we call that "prevention of lynch mobs".
    --
    "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  8. These lists are good, but.. by eniac42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have one important drawback - they tend to apply only within the host country. Some of these scam^h^h^h^h telesales-marketing companies operate from oversees (ie. from Canada calling EU countries)..

    --
    "A nation that forgets its past is doomed to repeat it." - Churchill
    1. Re:These lists are good, but.. by MollyB · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Another bummer: these registries only apply to marketers. Charities use the same tactics (Out of Area in CallerID, call more-or-less daily, and won't leave a message). I don't care who is bothering me for cash. All they get is a request to be removed from the call list.
      (I have nothing against NGOs/charities. If I wish to donate, I can find my own suitable organization without prodding.)

    2. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't know about anywhere else but, here in the UK, I've found it to be very effective. Before I registered I was getting 2-3 calls a night, now I get none, yep, none at all.

      --
      init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    3. Re:These lists are good, but.. by digitig · · Score: 1

      I often respond to telemarketers by asking "Are you incompetents who don't know the regulations relating to your business, or crooks who ignore it?", but as more and more are operating from overseas, and so from outside the coverage of the regulations that isn't working as well as it used to, and the TPS (the UK equivalent of the DNC list) is looking increasingly irrelevant.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    4. Re:These lists are good, but.. by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I wish to donate, I can find my own suitable organization without prodding


      I'd take that a step further. If I wish to donate, its to a charity that won't be spending my money paying someone to coldcall people to whore for donations.
      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
    5. Re:These lists are good, but.. by penix1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have nothing against NGOs/charities. If I wish to donate, I can find my own suitable organization without prodding.


      NGO/charities aren't the only exemption in the law. The thing is so full of loopholes it looks like Swiss Cheese. For example, the DNC list has an exemption for anyone a company has dome business with in the past year or so. Of course, doing business hasn't been defined but that's just a technicality. In short, they tried to make opt-out the default for telemarketing just like they did with spam. Worse, it can take up to a year after you put yourself on the list for it to take effect. The Do-Not-Call list is one of the biggest publicity stunt Congress has pulled in a decade. Nothing more. the only thing this gets is the most blatant phone spammers.
      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    6. Re:These lists are good, but.. by aeschenkarnos · · Score: 1

      Exactly right. The future of telemarketing is this: telemarketers in country A ring suckers in country B, and telemarketers in country B ring suckers in country A, thus evading Do Not Call laws in both countries.

    7. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I feel it necessary to say that there is another important drawback. I used to work as a telemarketer and we would take the DNC list the government gave us and PURPOSEFULLY call the people on the list, because we figured they were suckers. We received very few complaints, and a lot of money from these people. Remember, if you're on the DNC list and you're being called regularly, be sure to find out the name of the company that called you and contact your Attorney General. The AG will at the least impose a fairly hefty several thousand dollar fine against the company that did it.

    8. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      "Have one important drawback - they tend to apply only within the host country. Some of these scam^h^h^h^h telesales-marketing companies operate from oversees (ie. from Canada calling EU countries).."

      In the USA, the company that stands to benefit from breaking the law is liable for the actions of their agents, the marketers, no matter where the call center might be located. Ameriquest Mortgage, for example, had a horde of "resellers" making the calls for them, but that didn't keep them from getting fined.

    9. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe like in Denmark where you don't even have to register.

      I think only polls are allowed; at least I get a call from these like once every year.

    10. Re:These lists are good, but.. by cjb-nc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Do-Not-Call list is one of the biggest publicity stunt Congress has pulled in a decade.
      The second being this event here. Look everyone, we caught *FIVE* big ticket offenders. See? It works! Really. We're doing our job. Never mind that each and every one of you has probably had to report five different companies for ignoring the list. They just weren't big enough to bother to go after.
    11. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US it seems to have... wait, phone's ringing...nevermind, just a telemarketer... like I was saying, I used to get several calls every night, but now... hold on a sec...I think it works pretty well and I'm glad...let me get that...

      Oh forget it.

    12. Re:These lists are good, but.. by thejynxed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And you know how they get you with that loophole? Every go into a Wallmart, Best Buy, or shop online at any number of random sites (Apple iTunes or Amazon for instance)? Now you have a good idea of why they ask you for your phone number when you pay by credit card or otherwise ask you for your phone number as part of account registry or the final sale information.

      Convenient way to not only harvest your purchasing history, but it also gives them implicit permission to call your home and to allow their "partners" to do the same. Some of these companies may not have actually violated the list directly. Not their fault people don't pay attention to such details ya know.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    13. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 1

      I won't say that I don't get any calls anymore, but the situation is vastly improved. A few years ago, I was working out of state, and I'd come home on the weekends to find over a hundred calls recorded on my caller ID. This was before I had voice mail, and the volume of calls I was getting literally broke my answering machine!

      Now, yeah, I still get several calls a day from "Toll Free Number", but it's easy enough to just not answer those, and at least the phone isn't ringing constantly. This is one of the few times government actually did something right....

    14. Re:These lists are good, but.. by maspatra · · Score: 1

      Most of the cold-calling charities are totally bogus anyway, and only charities in the loosest sense of the word. I keep getting harassed by the local Chiefs of Police Association and when I checked online on a charity watch site I saw something like 79% of their money goes to fundraising, 15% to administrative, and like 6% to actual charity work. Combine that with the audacity to once claim that I had made a prior commitment to give them money and an abject refusal to remove me from their list they're every bit as bad as people selling you garbage if not worse IMO. The "it's OK to call if you have a prior business relationship" clause needs to go too I think. Just because I use Verizon for my cell phone doesn't give you the right to attempt to sell me your stupid DSL over the phone every day.

    15. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Drathos · · Score: 1

      The US DNC has been an utter failure for me. I went from 4-5 telemarketer calls per week to 10-15 calls per day - occasionally as early as 6am. Most are autodialers (with forged caller-id) without anything on the other end of the line with several 'political survey' calls and a few charities mixed in. Of the times where there's something on the other end of the line, 99% of the time it's a pre-recorded message. I've come home from an afternoon with friends and found 15 messages on my answering machine of "This was a political survey call. We'll try again later." And that's not even counting election season when my phone is ringing off the hook and my answering machine is filling up with pre-recorded messages.

      --
      End of line..
    16. Re:These lists are good, but.. by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      This is a good time to mention Child's Play, a charity that won't ever call you and where 100% of what you donate goes to the kids.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    17. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I achieved the same effect by unplugging my phone...

    18. Re:These lists are good, but.. by dbc001 · · Score: 1

      Now you have a good idea of why they ask you for your phone number when you pay by credit card or otherwise ask you for your phone number as part of account registry or the final sale information.
      Is this really true? I once heard that they ask for your phone number because they need your phone number to get your mailing address from the credit card companies. Which is it?
    19. Re:These lists are good, but.. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      I'm not asking this question to justify telemarketing but can I ask how you envision a non-evil charity should raise funds?

      I was thinking about a project someone could do where they amass all charities on a website, and sort them by several metrics (admin cost ratio, independent review, reputation ranking, volunteer satsifaction, area of expertise, etc.) and then you'd be able to allocate optimally, and easily find new charities. This would be better than the hap-hazard system of people donating to whoever makes noise ("disabled pet helpers" over "orphan rescue"). There are, of course, charity aggregator sites, but not to my knowledge like I've described.

      But I'd like to know if there's a current respectable procedure a charity can follow that's actually effective.

    20. Re:These lists are good, but.. by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      For example, the DNC list has an exemption for anyone a company has dome business with in the past year or so. Of course, doing business hasn't been defined but that's just a technicality.

      I have a sneaking suspicion that there's an extremely loose "affiliates" clause in the definition of "business". Something along the lines of "Apple "affiliate" AT&T, sells an iPhone that uses "affiliate" AT&T's services, which can access "affiliate" GE's holdings, which includes "affiliates" NBC and the SCi-Fi channel, both of which produce content playable on an iPhone, and both of which air commercials from their "affiliates" Cialis, Kellogg's, and Swiffer, that are carried over wires managed by our "affiliate" Con Edison, via telephone poles planted in "affiliate" Donald Trump's land, etc.".

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    21. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried that with my cell phone, but it didn't work.

    22. Re:These lists are good, but.. by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, no. In the years since the DNC list, I have had 1 and only 1 telemarketer call. It works.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    23. Re:These lists are good, but.. by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 1

      I read an opinion piece* a few years ago (not too long after the DNC registry went into effect) that said that most of those charity calls you get now are actually telemarketering firms who give a small fraction (less than half) of the money to the charities. I suppose the charities often don't mind, they're getting money for, it appears, free. But it's bad news. I'd like to see the law amended to say that you can only use the charity exemption to the DNC registry if you're giving, say, 80% or more of the donations to the charity itself.

      * I mention the source because I'm taking the author's word for this -- although it wasn't perhaps the best authority. However, my experience is that I'm getting far, far more calls on behalf of charities than I used to, so I fully believe that this is the case.

    24. Re:These lists are good, but.. by brjndr · · Score: 1

      I'm of Indian descent, and my parents get calls to subscribe to Dish Networks almost daily, because Dish offers channels from India. The calls come from a call center in India, and always at dinner time. they won't stop calling even when we ask. The worst part is we ALREADY have Dish with those channels. The callers always say they are calling on behalf of Dish, but it's some third party installer.

      The only way that we can get them to stop it so punish the company that hired them here in the US, because we have no jurisdiction over a company from India.

    25. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Steve001 · · Score: 1

      aeschenkarnos wrote:

      Exactly right. The future of telemarketing is this: telemarketers in country A ring suckers in country B, and telemarketers in country B ring suckers in country A, thus evading Do Not Call laws in both countries.

      This could lead to the following: people turn their phone ringer off, allow voice mail/answering machines to screen their calls, and have an alternate system in place for people who need to contact them immediately (such as a pager). End result: telemarketers are completely cut off from being able to contact anyone.

    26. Re:These lists are good, but.. by MollyB · · Score: 1
      Interesting. I've been on the list for four years, but knew little of the back-story on the DNC Registry until just now. The section(s) in the link appear to illuminate the mechanism by which changes in implementation of the law are made:

      The Do-Not-Call Implementation Act of 2003 (Public Law No. 108-10, was H.R. 395 of the 108th Congress) was sponsored by Representatives Billy Tauzin and John Dingell and signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 11, 2003. This law establishes the FTC's National Do Not Call Registry in order to facilitate compliance with the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991."
      Complaints concerning telemarketing calls to homes and personal cell phones can be made to the Federal Communications Commission[6] and the Federal Trade Commission[7]. Note that both of these federal agencies are agencies of limited resources; the more succinct, specific, and complete a complaint, the greater the chance that it will be acted upon.

      The Federal Communications Commission has created rules implementing the National Do-Not-Call Implementation Act. These rules are codified at the Code of Federal Regulations, title 47, Section 64.1200.[8] The rules should be consulted in order to determine whether a particular incident violated the rules and can result in enforcement.

      In order to create an actionable complaint pursuant to FCC rules, an individual with a home phone or a personal cell phone is required to specify details of the infraction to the FCC. Typically this includes facts such as when the call occurred, the phone number called, the calling organization, the goods or services being marketed, whether the caller has any exemption status. Details of these rules can be found on the FCC's complaint form.[9] As I see it, the devil is in the details; Congress Acts, and the FCC makes the rules. Who's running the show? The FTC or FCC? I'm too lazy to go read Section 64.1200, title 47 at the Code of Federal Regulations. I realize all are sock-puppets of Darth Cheney... I just don't want to be bothered by strangers at all! 8)
    27. Re:These lists are good, but.. by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      They could try snail mail. You know the method that doesnt start with "stop what you're doing and listen to our message NOW". Provide all the information in the flier for me to check the charity out and make sure it's legit too... That would be a bonus. When I'm reading my mail is the ONLY time during the day I'll entertain such requests. I'm not doing anything else or being interrupted from something more important.

      A smart charity would honor the DNC list, even though they're not required to. Simplest way to ensure that I will never give a DIME to your charity is to bother me on the phone or knock on my door.

      I donated a perfectly good car, everything working, to a charity that collects such things for single mothers looking to get on their feet and into the work force. I did this because I got a flyer in the mail, decided I liked the idea, and wanted to make sure that the car that had helped ME get on my feet went to someone who would make best use of it. (I had also heard of the charity before and was intrigued by their mission.)

      If I had received a phone call or a door visit from someone asking for same, that never would have happened.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
  9. Why not just ban all telemarketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unless one specifically indicates to -one- firm at a time that they don't mind and might even like to be called about their latest news/offers (ala email/newsletters)?

    NO ONE wants to be called by -random- telemarketers at home, selling what usually amounts to nothing but a flat out scam. It's preposterous we continue to accept it as a 'part of the market' or whatever it is that makes us keep allowing it to happen at all.

    1. Re:Why not just ban all telemarketing by mpe · · Score: 1

      Unless one specifically indicates to -one- firm at a time that they don't mind and might even like to be called about their latest news/offers (ala email/newsletters)?

      Probably by something a little more explicit than ticking/not ticking a tiny box. It also needs to be made clear that giving a business a telephone number so that they can respond to a specific query does not give them any cause to call that number for something completely unrelated.

    2. Re:Why not just ban all telemarketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since there's been plenty of talk and occasionally actual discussion about making various forms of online and mail advertising opt-in only, why not do the same for telemarketing? Have a well publicized method of opting in for telemarketing calls. It could even have people specify the types of calls they want. Then you don't get opt out lists being out dated, ignored, or lost. If your number isn't on the list and you don't have something in writing saying 'yes, call me', then you're in violation of whatever laws end up applying.

      I know, this will never happen. Big business has too much money to throw at making sure legislation that makes them behave like reasonable citizens never gets passed. But it's certainly a nice thought.

    3. Re:Why not just ban all telemarketing by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      or whatever it is that makes us keep allowing it to happen at all.

      That would be the First Amendment. It protects commercial speech. (See e.g. Central Hudson v. Public Service)

      As with door-to-door soliciting, telemarketing relies on your implied consent, but that consent is presumed by default in our society. You can expressly withdraw it on an individual basis (e.g. telling a specific marketer to not call you / go to your door again) or by posting adequate notice (e.g. a do-not-solicit sign on the lawn). The DNC list isn't ideal, IMO, but it basically tries to do that last. Better would be to alter the phone system so that numbers could be flagged as do-not-call directly by the account holder, and would appear as such when dialed, but before the call actually went through, so that the call attempt could be abandoned before it impacted the recipient.

      Ultimately, telemarketing is an annoying but unavoidable side-effect of free speech, somewhat like Skokie Nazis.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  10. Re:Slashdot by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

    Not that I'd mind mobs lynching marketers...

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  11. Almost there... by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To date, consumers have put more than 145 million numbers on the Registry, indicating they do not want to receive calls from telemarketers at home.

    Now if only they'd remove the exemptions for charities and politicians, I'd call this a job well done.

    1. Re:Almost there... by Lunarsight · · Score: 1

      Amen - I had one politician repeatedly leaving automated messages on my voicemail. I politely emailed him and asked him to stop, and he basically said "No" because it's 'more cost-efficient than mailings'.

      Did I vote for him in the last election? No. (He was all rhetoric and little substance.)

      The problem is, all politicians feel the need to do this because they fear their opponents will. So, the only way to stop it is to ban it outright (for DNC list subscribers, at least).

      (On a sidenote, SPRINT is one of the BIGGEST abusers of telemarketing. I've been on the DNC list for some time, and a few weeks ago, I had some overseas arm of Sprint calling me repeatedly, saying I 'won a free cell phone'. I got about three or four calls like this over a couple days. If they can confirm this was truly Sprint, they should fine the holy hell out of them. I'll NEVER purchase anything from them. They've been a telemarketing pain-in-the-rectum as far back as I can remember.)

    2. Re:Almost there... by JasonEngel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I would rather not get unsolicited calls, I do actually approve of the allowances for charities to call. I get about one charitable call per week, they've never happened after 5pm or on weekends, and they are almost always for material donations rather than money (ie clothes, food, etc). It's turned out on a few occasions that I've actually had a very good personal benefit from such calls, ending up with a good way to eliminate a lot of old clothes, especially the kids' old stuff.

      However, with that said, my tolerance for charitable calls would evaporate quickly if they became more frequent, began to intrude on family time (please no calls evenings or weekends), or became pushy or demanding.

    3. Re:Almost there... by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Thanks for reminding me about that.

      I usued to regularly get phone calls about a free cellphone from Sprint. I promised myself that I wouldn't purchase a sprint phone because of that. I had almost forgotten about those calls.

      They were damned annoying too because it was obviously coming from outside the country, during dinner, and they just wouldn't stop. If I were more of a conspiracy theorist, I would almost believe that they were calls being placed by a competitor using Sprint's name because they were so annoying.

      But, I'd rather just imagine that Sprint was being a normal asshole company and not buy their products.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    4. Re:Almost there... by Overzeetop · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You clearly don't get the 4x year call from the Fraternal Order Troopers Society calling "on behalf" of the local police organization asking for cash for policemen retirement benefits, or some such. You know, I have established business relationships with all the charities I donate to. Being on the DNC list doesn't prevent them from calling me (that whole prior relationship thing). If necessary, get a 2 bit identifier attached to the DNC list; set bit zero as charities and bit one as political action. With 145M people on the DNC list, that ads up to a whopping 20MB of additional space. If it means getting it added, I'll send them a nickel to cover the cost of the extra storage.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    5. Re:Almost there... by Kraegar · · Score: 1, Funny
      Now if only they'd remove the exemptions for charities and politicians, I'd call this a job well done.

      I regularly got calls from the Dove Foundation. Like one or two a month. Then I started doing this...

      Telemarketer: This is calling on behalf of the Dove Foundation...

      Me: (Interrupting) Oh, is that where I can buy some freshly killed dove to cook, and you donate the cost to help out some charity?

      Telemarketer: Ack! Uh, no! (etc)

      Me: (hang up) They've never called again.

    6. Re:Almost there... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Hell, maybe you're right, and it is a Joe Job.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    7. Re:Almost there... by Insightfill · · Score: 1

      Amen - I had one politician repeatedly leaving automated messages on my voicemail. I politely emailed him and asked him to stop, and he basically said "No" because it's 'more cost-efficient than mailings'.

      You DO know that this was a Republican tactic in many areas to smear the Democrats. You would receive a robocall claiming to have important message about Democratic Candidate "X" (fill in your local person here). The message would take a while, but of course, most people would have hung up in outrage (repeated calls) pretty early on. It was only at the end of the message that you would learn that the call was being SPONSORED by the opposition. Pretty bad.

    8. Re:Almost there... by Lunarsight · · Score: 1

      While I can definitely see that sort of tactic, I know in this case it was legitimately the politician doing it. I got him to admit it. He didn't deny it for one second. I just checked my voicemail today - four political advertisements spammed there on the Monday and Tuesday of the election. Blah.

  12. And this is going to do what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The FCC has become as effective as the UN with regard to policy enforcement.

  13. Re:Slashdot by mpe · · Score: 1

    You might also note: companies are no allowed to drive around at 1am with a giant bullhorn aimed at homes, selling their products. CENSORSHIP!?!? No.

    More likely they couldn't find anyone prepared to do the job. Especially after the first few angry (and sleep deprived) mobs.
    Whereas with someone doing the same by telephone you can't do much to retaliate.

  14. Re:Slashdot by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

    And hardly "all-american". Many of the telephone spam companies use third-world call centers who speak English well, better than many Americans, but whose accents are noticeably Mexican, Indian, Pakistani, etc.

  15. US government served us well in this case. by Morky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The government saw telemarketing was a growing problem, and for all intents and purposes, fixed it. Taking a decision that results in lost jobs is usually antithetical to US politicians, but they did it anyway. Thanks for representing the people!

    1. Re:US government served us well in this case. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats ok those kinds of jobs can go away and nobody will care. Too bad for those individuals but maby they can go out and get a legitimate job.

    2. Re:US government served us well in this case. by ucblockhead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know that I'd say "fixed it". I know I still get annoying calls, especially from "charities" or people "doing surveys". More like they took a stabbing pain and turned it into a dull ache. This is typical government: mediocre half-action which is, at least, better than nothing.

      --
      The cake is a pie
  16. Charity exemption by ortholattice · · Score: 2, Informative
    For me, the do-not-call registry has worked pretty well in the sense that I'm getting many fewer calls from commercial companies.

    The problem now is the charity exemption. Years ago I don't recall receiving anywhere near the charity solicitations that I do now. Charities seem to be popping up out of the woodwork.

    For example, it used to be you'd get a call from a real local police person once a year, asking to donate to their fund, and receive tickets to their annual comedy show or some such where you could meet the actual people. Now there's the police safety education fund, the police widows fund, the police families fund, the police community fund, the state police fund, etc. etc. (I'm making up some of these names since I don't remember them, but you get the idea), most of which seem to have nothing to do with the local police dept and are obviously being made from telemarketing centers. Some of them offer official stickers to put on your house door or your car, with the unstated implication that it might be good to have them if you're stopped, or worse it might be bad not to have them... And double all this for the firemen's funds. Never mind the innumerable "special olympics".

    I'm all for helping my local police, but this is ridiculous. I know some people have no trouble brushing them off, and I force myself to do that too, but with that twinge of guilt that some widow may now starve because of me (even though rationally I suspect it's a scam) - and I imagine many nice aunts and grandmothers are easily sucked into their pitches.

    I know, call screening and all that. Unfortunately I'm an old-fashioned person who tends to answer the phone when it rings. On the other hand, I've come to recognize the few seconds of silence after I say "hello", and then the sudden telemarketing background noise when their computer switches me into the next free telemarketer. *Plonk*.

    1. Re:Charity exemption by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      My standard response is 'I don't respond to telephone solicitations. Period. You call me, I don't donate to you or buy your product/service. Don not call me again'.

      Keep track of the information; I'm not a lawyer, but I remember reading at some time that while Charities/Politics/surveys don't have to follow the DNCL, they do have to respect individual DNC requests.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  17. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's fairly weak retaliation to a phone solicitor, but ...

    (1) Get their agent interested and when you're sure they're listening closely, blow the rape-whistle into the phone as loud and as long as you can.

    (2) Once again, make sure the agent is invested in you as a potential customer; when they get into their long speach about how you need whatever they're selling, tell them you need a short pause to tend to a bothersome child. Then, leaving the phone on a table or nearby flat surface, walk away and watch some TV ... or take a nice walk outside, weather permitting. Don't forget to hang the phone back up when you are done.

  18. First call in years... by Aladrin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yesterday, I got my first call in years that wasn't from a wrong number or someone I knew.

    They started off asking for me by name, and I asked why. They said they wanted to do a survey. I said, 'Do you not know I'm on the Do Not Call list?' 'We're not trying to sell anything.' After about 2 minutes of nastily telling him that he was profiting from me, and therefore WAS selling something, he said 'We'll call back tomorrow.' and hung up before I could reply. That was at 5pm... Yeah, dinner time. Another 'Unknown' number called at 8pm, but I hung up before they could talk.

    I'm hoping they do call back again today so I can yell at another one of them and waste their time. I'm asking for a manager straight off this time.

    It's kind of nice to have someone to yell at again... It's almost a shame the DNC list works so well.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:First call in years... by MrMunkey · · Score: 1

      Years ago I worked for a tele-research company doing just that. Aparently they got around do not call lists (I think they were state lists at the time) because they actually did work for the government. They were allowed to do random number dialing... no lists required. That's probably why they asked for your name, but the person you talked to was a complete douche. Callbacks are created by dispositions from the agent. Normally a dialer in that line of work doesn't automatically re-schedule calls. That said, I don't want them calling me either, but I'm more apt to answer a survey than take a tele-marketing call... as long as I don't have to give too much personal information.

    2. Re:First call in years... by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      I probably would have reacted better if they'd said what they wanted right off, instead of asking for me by name. If they'd just said 'Sir, we're doing a survey. Can you answer some questions about your TV habits?' then I'd probably have answered... In fact, I -have- answered surveys over the phone before.

      And yeah, he definitely didn't have the right attitude to be a telemarketer.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    3. Re:First call in years... by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      I get calls from surveys all the time, and I sometimes participate if I have a few minutes. All of them have been legit, and legitimate surveyors *are* allowed to call you (along with charities and politicians).

      If they call, just demand to be placed on their do not call list, simple as that.

      The real problem that I'm having is telemarketers who shamelessly break the law and use caller id blocking and such. And I noticed that the FTC didn't go after any of them.

      Actually, I'm let down by this action, as most of the companies that they went after this time called people after those people had filled out a contact form including a phone number. What am I missing? I didn't even know that was illegal. Looks like they went after the low-hanging fruit to get a press release.

      NC Attorney General Roy Cooper has single-handedly done more than the FTC. Google him if you don't believe me.

  19. I hate telemarketers by Healyhatman · · Score: 1

    The arrogance of some companies! Maybe it was a mistake and they 'didn't know' but too bad, they're a business and they're supposed to know. This doesn't help much here in Australia, but maybe you poor Americans will be left alone to eat your dinner in peace/.

    1. Re:I hate telemarketers by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      www.donotcall.gov.au

      Did you miss the memo or something?

    2. Re:I hate telemarketers by Healyhatman · · Score: 1

      Apparently I did.... Thanks for the headsup though "_)

  20. Wrong tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another 'Unknown' number called at 8pm, but I hung up before they could talk.

    Wrong thing to do. You should make it sound like you are interested but then say you prefer to speak on another extension (or that they should talk to your wife instead). Then just lay the handset down. 10 minutes later you return to hang up.

    It will waste their time and their money.

    1. Re:Wrong tactics by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Better yet, the guys at the call centre are marked down if they hang up on a mark, and also marked down for a poor number of calls per unit time and a poor sales percentage. So you might actually manage to get a telemarketer fired - or at least cut his commission.

      This has the effect of making life more miserable for telemarketers as a whole, and thus makes it harder and more expensive for the companies to find staff. If everyone did this, we might even be able to make the whole practice uneconomical!

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  21. Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by DanielJosphXhan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Instead of going after voice spammers for simply filling a market void, instead of creating burdensome bureaucracy and yet more laws, there should be a free-market, technical solution to this problem.

    Allow the market to function, and such a thing will happen. Allow the government to function, and you'll have a half-assed law that only gets enforced when it's profitable.

    --
    [ think ]
    1. Re:Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a committed Libertarian, but even I can't see how the market will prevent "voice spammers" (love that term) from harassing me. I'm seriously interested in your views on how this would work. Please let us know.

    2. Re:Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by travdaddy · · Score: 1

      I can't see how the market will prevent "voice spammers" Here's your free market solution. Works for real spam!

      --
      Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
    3. Re:Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by apparently · · Score: 1

      There's nothing preventing the free market from developing this tech now, Trolly McTrollTroll.

    4. Re:Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by tompaulco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, but I am not willing to pay money for a service to stop people from calling me. This is like giving the bully your lunch money so he won't pester you on the schoolyard. Instead, I would want the telcos to let me quote a price for how many dollars per minute I will charge to talk to an incoming caller. The telco can keep a small percentage of this amount, and by pushing a button on the phone on incoming calls, I can waive the fee. If they falsify their incoming caller ID, I can push a button to bump the per minute fee up by a magnitude of three, and blocked caller ID automatically results in a multiple of three per minute fee.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    5. Re:Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by spyingwind · · Score: 1

      If thous features ever appeared on any cell phone service providers' phones. I would definitely buy the phone in a heart beat.

      My sure way of getting off there list >:D

      Telemarketer: I am from the [insert company]... blah blah blah...

      Me: um... you do realize that this is a business phone number, and that it is illegal to call me?

      Telemarketer: Oh, sorry (hangup)

      even thou IANAL, I've gotten less and less phone calls.

      ~Spy

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
    6. Re:Or maybe go after the root of the problem. by Fission86 · · Score: 1

      I believe such a thing already exists, it's called a 1-900 number

      --
      Coming to you live from another dimension.
  22. A clasic response: by ubrgeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TM: Hi, would you be interested in switching over to TMI long distance service.

    Jerry Seinfeld: Gee, I can't talk right now. Why don't you give me your home number and I'll call you later.

    TM: Uh, I'm sorry we're not allowed to do that.

    Jerry Seinfeld: Oh, I guess you don't want people calling you at home.

    TM: No.

    Jerry Seinfeld: Well now you know how I feel.

    --
    Bark less. Wag more.
    1. Re:A clasic response: by snl2587 · · Score: 1

      TM: Hello. Is this Mr. Seinfeld? Jerry Seinfeld: Yes. *click* ...or something like that. I'm too lazy to look up the exact quote.

  23. Recordings without contact numbers.. by iknownuttin · · Score: 1
    There's a company that likes to call here in Metro Atlanta - "Card Service" is their name. It's a recording that tries to get you to transfer your credit card balance to their cards and the recording just says stay on the line and press '3', IIRC, to get a live operator. I can never get a live operator and when I do a *69, the phone company tells me it's unavailable.

    I can't find a location on th net for them - at least a company by that name that would issue a card. There is a "Card Services International" that will process them.Anyway, it smells REAL fishy and I can't get information to report them.

    There's also the folks who offer "free" services and then they'll sell you stuff when they get to your house. The water testing companies love to do this. Their marketing folks will say your water is unsafe and they'll test it for free. When they get to your house they'll try to sell you a filtration system that doesn't work well for hundreds $$$ You can get one in the home centers much cheaper and their's work. So, there's plenty of folks who are getting around it.

    --
    I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
    1. Re:Recordings without contact numbers.. by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      They need to put the phone tapping system to work for us. If we get one of those recorded calls, we should be able to fill out a simple form with the time and date, then have the phone company identify the caller for us. Recorded pitches are generally illegal, afaict, and I thought they carried hefty judgments for those who bothered to take them to court. All I want is the same access then NSA has.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:Recordings without contact numbers.. by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      Their marketing folks will say your water is unsafe and they'll test it for free.

      Just reply:

      "Really!! I guess I should call my water company and let them know that your company has definitively stated that their water is unsafe. I should probably call Clark Howard as well so that he may alert my neighbors to the terrible dangers lurking right beneath our very noses. Tell me oh wise telemarketing guy, what was your name again? I'll need to be sure I get it right when the attorneys contact me regarding the massive class action lawsuit that's been brought against the city and state."

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    3. Re:Recordings without contact numbers.. by bensode · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use this often seems to work nicely.

      http://www.whocalled.us/

      I've had a couple calls from them and when I ask to speak with a supervisor, I get hung up on. They also list their number in the recording where you can call back, which prompts you to leave a voice mail or to hold on to talk to a representative. I think I called back about 25 times, each time holding for a minute and requesting to speak to a supervisor, each time I was hung up on. Oh the fun of Skype-Out calling the telemarketers wondering who is calling THEM! =)

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
    4. Re:Recordings without contact numbers.. by Xentor · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link... I don't have a land-line (Cell only), so I largely avoid the telemarketers, but if they start on me, that site looks quite useful.

      +1 Informative

      --
      "The amount of intelligence on this planet is a constant. The population is growing." -Cole's Axiom
    5. Re:Recordings without contact numbers.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      For ~$20, you can get your own phone recording system.

      Just read up on wiretapping laws before you hook it up. BTW, I think that it's been determined that if they have a disclaimer 'This call may be recorded' disclaimer counts for both sides.

      Rules might be different if you're recording commercial traffic, a recording, or recording to catch a criminal in the act(like harrasing/threatening phone calls).

      Of course, I'm not a lawyer, but it'd be interesting to hear from one.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    6. Re:Recordings without contact numbers.. by DogDaySunrise · · Score: 1

      Thinking about it, the phrase 'This call may be recorded' could always be interpreted as permission for you to do so...

  24. Is there a National Do Call Registry? by clickety6 · · Score: 2, Funny


    I'm sure lots of lonely people out there would like to sign up to such a registry!

    --
    ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
    1. Re:Is there a National Do Call Registry? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Copy the Luke Johnson Phone Experiment.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    2. Re:Is there a National Do Call Registry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is, but they generally take the liberty of doing it for you: http://www.the-dma.org/index.php

      Here's a direct link to the biggest offenders: http://www.the-dma.org/premiermember/

    3. Re:Is there a National Do Call Registry? by DanQuixote · · Score: 1


      Yes of course, just type your number in a blog somewhere...

      --
      "We think people rightly feel that once they buy something, it stays bought," --Suw Charman, Open Rights Grp
    4. Re:Is there a National Do Call Registry? by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's called America Online.

      --
      Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
  25. Never donate to charity telemarketers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get repeated solicitations from an outfit called "Non-Profit services". It's the standard Disabled Firefighters/Police, "Dogs against Drugs", etc. I know all of this because they persisted in calling so many times, I actually took the time to make them identify themselves and the charities they were calling for.

    According to data provided by the states of Indiana and Washington, these guys keep roughly 85% of donations -- only 15-16% goes to the charities. I was surprised that any charity would allow such a thing, only to realize that plenty of them are spending most of the proceeds on administrative overhead.

    I wonder what kind of person would give a credit card number (or anything else) to an anonymous caller. Obviously someone does, because the calls continue. Giving money to these people is not a whole lot different than throwing it out the window.

  26. DNCL uncharacteristic? by moosesocks · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or doesn't the Do Not Call List seem extremely uncharacteristic of the US Government?

    It is *literally* the only bit of significant legislation I can think of in the last 15 years solely designed to protect consumers, and punish abusive corporations.

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    1. Re:DNCL uncharacteristic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not uncharacteristically they gave themselves a loophole allowing political calls - do as I say not as I do.

    2. Re:DNCL uncharacteristic? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      Well, the telesale industry has been in decline for a long time, its usually scammy, and doesnt provide any real employment. It pisses people off and they dont really have a powerful lobby. The lobby of pissed of constitieunts eventually beat them. Considering that scammy sales have migrated to the web/email, I dont think anyone is taking a real loss. Its just more cost effective for these scammers to move to spam anyway.

  27. Weaknesses of the DNC list by keraneuology · · Score: 1
    1. Corporations do not make the decision to call and harass me, individuals within the corporation do. If you were to fine the person who authorized those calls even fifty cents the calls would stop. Forever.

    2. The phone companies should be forced to provide - at no charge - an option to reject calls with blocked or out of area caller ID. Even for those customers who don't subscribe to caller ID. Such calls are invariably sales or other solicitation pitches and, as they are always unwanted, harassing and NOT protected by law. Since the phone company has taken explicit steps to allow people to obfuscate their identification for the purpose of harassment they are co-conspirators. Ideally the people who made the decision to authorize this harassment would be punished, but as that is exceptionally unlikely just force them to provide free call blocking. Cut into their revenue stream? Charge the calling banks $1.00 for every number they dial that is blocked. Now THAT would be incentive for people to honor the DNC lists!

    --
    If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
  28. Everyone is calling by mhollis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yesterday, I got called by "Asia," saying she was from a local Chiropractor's office and wanted me to come in for a "Free" Spinal Analysis.

    I reported the call to the State licensing board, saying that if he is hiring "fly-by-night" telemarketing companies, it was possible that he is doing questionable practice. I also reported the call to the FTC and called my Chiropractor (who went to the same, very respected, College) to complain.

    Usually, whenever I inform the caller that my phone is on a "Do Not Call" registry, they hang up and try not to give me any information about their company or whereabouts.

    I used to live in an illegal sublet in NYC and all calls were for a "Mr. or Mrs SomeotherLastname." I would very calmly inform the caller that I was "Mr. SomeotherLastname's" brother from the midwest and that they had just passed away. I would very politely enquire if they had an open account with them or some other business with them. This was before the Do Not Call Registry was set up and it was very amusing to hear the reactions.

    --
    Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
    1. Re:Everyone is calling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Asia" ... wanted me to come in for a "Free" Spinal Analysis.

      I take it the "happy ending" costs extra.

    2. Re:Everyone is calling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I reported the call to the State licensing board... I used to live in an illegal sublet in NYC and ...

      Hypocrite much? :D

    3. Re:Everyone is calling by mhollis · · Score: 1

      You obviously never lived in NYC.

      --
      Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
  29. Re:Slashdot by spikedvodka · · Score: 1
    --
    I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
  30. Help for Canadians receiving calls from US? by failedlogic · · Score: 1

    I've been getting the really annoying phone call for last 2 months or more now on a weekly basis. The gist is, you pick up and an automated recording lasting more than 2 minutes begins to play. The call display sometimes shows a phone number but most often does not. It then asks to press 1 to speak to someone or "2" to be placed on do-not call list. I hang up incase its a scam for long-distance calls.

    The volume on these calls alone is deafening. The phone volume alone makes me feel like I'd really like to give someone there a piece of my mind should I ever encouter them.

    In any case, I've reason to believe the calls are coming from the US. The company never identifies itself. But I've google searched the call and its been narrowed down to one three companies.

    I live in Canada. The police, our "do-not-call" registry, the government, etc can't do anything unless I am the victim of a crime. I can't even report it. The telco I'm with wants money to block these calls. They won't tell me the actual phone number of the caller and would only release to police under court order. I've looked on-line to report in the US. I'd report to the BBB of the state where caller is located but I don't know the call display to be accurate.

    Any suggestions would be welcome. I'd really like to take down as many as these clowns from calling people as possible. We all benefit!

    1. Re:Help for Canadians receiving calls from US? by thorkyl · · Score: 1

      Just set the phone down and let the recording play.
      It ties up their available ports on the dialer.
      Then call the phone company, tell them you think someone just tried to
      cram you long distance carrier, and you want to make sure it does not
      change. Also call your power provider, cell provider, and do the same thing.

      Or better yet, plug a fax machine into the line. when you hear the recording
      press send. If they are using a predictive dialer in either predictive, or proactive mode
      it will flag the number as a data line and after x number of calls the dialer will flag the
      number as a DNC-D (do not call - data)

      (Yes I am on a contract for a call center, no we don't sell anything, they do surveys)

      --
      -- I am the NRA, enough said...
    2. Re:Help for Canadians receiving calls from US? by tomstdenis · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I used to get calls from Chinese people [in Toronto] wanting to place calling card calls. At all hours too, like 3am!!! Sometimes I'd tell them "wrong number" and they'd just call back!!! Eventually I just shut the ringer off at night. If someone really needed to call me they could just call my cell.

      Now that I moved out of toronto I don't get any sort of rubbish calls, except for the first 6 months on my cell I'd get calls for someone else. Again same deal, "wrong number" then 20 seconds later they'd call again in case they "misdialed". Same solution, I don't pick up the cell unless I recognize the number or am expecting it. Of course, then Rogers charges me $6 [used to be $5] for the privilege of seeing the number. It's a rotten scam if you ask me. They recycle freshly dropped numbers, then charge you money to avoid the "wrong number" hell.

      Fortunately, I'm not listed anywhere useful so I don't get telemarketer calls.

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    3. Re:Help for Canadians receiving calls from US? by ihaddsl · · Score: 1

      I've had similar calls here in the us. Some of them show as a 442 area code number - which was assigned but AFAIK never used. It is similar to how some UK caller id's show up (e.g. London) (country code 44, number starts with 2) but it's not long enough to be a UK number

      answer it and it's a recording, saying it's your 'customer service department' or somesuch, and to press 1 to talk to someone. After many such calls (I'm on the do not call list) I decided to talk to someone to see if I can find out any useful info. Of course the person who answers the phone is very evasive when asked what company they are representing, and then hangup on me.

      I'd love to report it but the phone number is fake and I've got no idea what the name of the company is.

    4. Re:Help for Canadians receiving calls from US? by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      Bad enough an entire blog is dedicated to listing voicemail messages and there's a ton of them in there. The second one down is the exact same message I'm getting annoyed with. "See Mar 15: Recording of travel fraud in this link": http://phonespam.blogspot.com/search?q=florida

      I can't find it now, but there's more than a few google postings about this company. I had the number in my call display and it identified at least 2 companies that were responsible, then again with the call display records being randomized, I don't really know its them. Some help the government is in all this.

      Of other postings I've found, people also tried to talk the telemarketers invovled in these scams. Unless you provide them with CCd details, they will immediately hang up on you.

      Personally, I don't think the do-not-call registries or fines go far enough. If people from Enron go to jail for fraud, they should impose prison sentences on people committing telemarketing fraud. If you're talking to someone and scamming them, you should go to jail.

  31. Try answering in another language by ehaggis · · Score: 2, Funny

    Answering in another language or gibberish is fun. Speak Java or C++ to them. Klingon is good.

    --
    One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
  32. Missionary Work by mulhollandj · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I try to engage in conversations with these people, when they are people, and try to convince them to let the missionaries from my church come and visit them. You would be surprised with how receptive these people are. I guess that is the risk for calling Utah.

  33. Settlements!? by thisissilly · · Score: 1

    I don't want no blasted settlements. I want them to fine the companies involved for the full amount under the law. If that drives them out of business, I say Good Riddance!

  34. To stop callers, even if they are legal: by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    To stop legal callers such as political parties and non-profits, just say this and no more:

    "Put me on your Do-Not-Call list."

    --
    U.S. Government corruption TimeLines
    Example: Complete 911 Timeline, 3895 events

    1. Re:To stop callers, even if they are legal: by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      It doesn't work. After I switched my cell phone from AT&T to Virgin Mobile last year, I kept getting automated phone calls and texts telling me that my service was expiring. This went on for months.

      When I needed to call AT&T for some reason, I explicitly asked that they put my number on their Do Not Call list. The response I got?

      "Sorry, we don't have one of our own. You need to register with the federal Do Not Call registry, and in about six weeks the calls will stop."

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    2. Re:To stop callers, even if they are legal: by Good+Little+Drone · · Score: 1

      I believe their response is incorrect and you have grounds for a complaint; they are required to immediately stop calling you if you ask them no matter what they tell you.

  35. (Almost) No more 5 year limit by lothar97 · · Score: 1
    The same link you refer also states that the FTC will not drop registrations pending the decision whether to extend the 5 year limit. I cannot imagine the FTC extending 5 year deadlines if there is no intend to actually extend the list. Keep up the public pressure.

    "...the Commission now commits that it will not drop any telephone numbers from the Registry based on the five-year expiration period pending final Congressional or agency action on whether to make registration permanent."
    Source: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/10/dnctestimony.shtm
    --

  36. Ameriquest? STILL? by seebs · · Score: 1

    They've been doing that for years. I think they've gotten sued for it on multiple occasions. I also seem to recall hearing that they're disintegrating and shrinking due to the collapse of the sub-prime market, but I could be wrong there.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  37. Carpet Cleaning by sconeu · · Score: 1

    I get those. If I'm in the mood, I'll do the "push 1 to setup an appointment". Then I'll sound interested, ask the rep for company info, etc... and then inform them that I'm filing a DNC violation with the FCC.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:Carpet Cleaning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had one of these call over and over. Hitting the don't call again number didn't work. The reps always refused to tell me anything. The times I tried to play along, I could never get past the first few questions (home much debt, income, etc). I log almost a dozen calls and complained to my state AG (which was ignored by forwarding to the FCC). Some of the reps were abusive, but most hung up the first second I deviated from the script. I really hope "Card Services" was one of the companies nailed. I hope those reps starve.

  38. Try VoIP (yes, seriously) by slash.duncan · · Score: 1

    Seriously, consider VoIP. Because VoIP is actually a competitive market, all the extras the telcos charge an arm and a leg for are normally thrown in at the base price. Voicemail, caller-id, conference-calling, selective-call-block, etc, all included. Of course, US/Canada calling is all included too. Some offer additional features like scheduled do-not-disturb times (with selective punch-thru for your kids or mom or whoever, if you prefer), while others offer wider international calling (15 nation or so, more available but at additional cost), as part of their differentiated feature-set. I chose a company and plan with a few more features, since the US/Canada covers my calling area needs.

    I have it setup here so blocked caller-id or out-of-area gets routed thru a prompt to enter a series of numbers, thus eliminating the machine calls while encouraging folks to unblock, but I could set it to totally block them if I preferred. No additional cost, of course.

    Now while I did choose not to port my number, as my old regular telco number was getting the usual number of undesired calls, guess how many such calls I've gotten on the VoIP since I switched. None. Nada. Zilch! =8^)

    Call quality is comparable to the former bell telco in the area, or to cell, but rather worse than the digiphone service I had from the cableco previously. (That was the best call quality I expect I'll ever have, but at comparable to telco costs, which is much higher than VoIP.)

    Cost, US Dollars, ~$25/mo BOTTOM LINE INCLUDING TAXES AND FEES depending on provider, or ~$20/mo ($200/yr plus a couple bucks a month taxes) annually prepaid. (Renewals can often be had for ~$150 annual prepaid.) I'm deliberately not mentioning the VoIP provider I chose as this isn't an ad, but those are the going market rates, so pretty close to what's available from several VoIP providers. (Note that all incoming or all outgoing can be had for less, this is for both, and including full US/Canada bundled calling area. Skype's less too, but locked provider and not standardized, so I avoided that route.)

    What's nice is that while I had been skipping out on the extra fee caller-ID as I had found it just wasn't effective for what I wanted it for and it cost extra, now that it's bundled, I upgraded my phone (I chose a VoIP adapter that a normal phone plugs into, tho dedicated VoIP phones are available) to a voice-announcing caller-ID phone, with distinctive ring as well. Thus, after the first standard ring, it announces who is calling based on the (no extra cost) caller ID, then switches to distinctive-ring if I have that ID programmed for it. No more looking at the caller ID, or waiting for the answerer to pickup and listening to it to find who's calling, before I decide whether it's worth picking up! Thus, even if a marketer does call (none have), it'd just announce caller out of area or whatever, and I'd just let the voicemail pickup.

    I've been very happy with it! =8^)

    --
    Duncan
    "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master,
    and if you use the program, he is your master."
    R Stallman
    1. Re:Try VoIP (yes, seriously) by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      I will seriously consider switching. I'm moving soon and also use a Blackberry as my cell. I'd rather have *one* phone line. It unfortunate AFAIK that I can't use a Blackberry with a VoIP provider. That would be killer value.

      I'd like to consider my options though. Any useful resources with less marketing speak that I can read through?

    2. Re:Try VoIP (yes, seriously) by slash.duncan · · Score: 1

      Two good resources I found were the list of providers at Wikipedia, and the VoIP forums at BroadbandReports.com. Many on the the Wikipedia list won't apply to you as they're limited area or whatever, but the list is long enough, there's likely to be some in your area anyway.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_voice_over_IP_network_providers

      You can also google some of those you find there and/or VoIP and/or SIP in general, for more resources. Take your time deciding.

      Of some interest, Vyke is a Norway HQed dialout-only provider, but at 4 cents (US) for call setup, no per minute fee, it /could/ be be cheaper than going with a full two-way provider. I tried it but being European based, my US credit cards wouldn't clear, so I've honestly no idea how well it works. The parallel to it for inbound would be CallCentric.com's inbound plans, particularly if you are in an area where you can get a Dirt Cheap number from them. The drawback of using separate sources for each is that services like conference calling, etc, can be harder to manage than integrated plans. I didn't try CallCentric either, however, as I intended to setup the Vyke thing for outgoing first, and when that fell thru, I went with an integrated instead.

      Of course, Vonage is one of the big, heavily advertised providers, but purely for that reason (and because their prices seem to run ~$5/mo higher than much of the competition), I had a negative gut reaction to them and never seriously considered them. Other than the price difference, that's purely personal/emotional, so feel particularly free to discount my opinion there. As they say, YMMV.

      If you go looking for hardware, the big two that seem to have hardware on the retail shelf are Vonage, and Skype. Skype is SIP based but has a proprietary element, meaning anything you buy to work with them is locked to them. That's not my thing, but they do seem to charge rather less. Another lockin-only provider is Lingo. I was actually somewhat tempted there, and they have some quite reasonable International plans, so if you have contacts in Asia or Western Europe, despite their lockin, they could be worth checking out. Just realize that any hardware you get to work with them may or may not be unlockable, if you decide they aren't your style. Lingo is BTW a Primus company. I understand they are more known in Canada than here, and not all favorably. I won't say more as I'm not in a position to judge one way or the other from here, but it may be of significance one way or the other to you.

      The Gizmo Project is associated with SIPphone. They're claim to fame is a software phone that does free calls (with catchs), but I only do Free Software and it's not, so it was out much as Skype was.

      Wengo is active in the Linux community with Wengophone, which IS free software. Their setup didn't seem to match my needs, however (IIRC they were mostly European or something? don't remember for sure), or I'd have probably preferred them.

      Sunrocket WAS a pretty big provider, but just went belly up recently. Particularly if you choose to prepay, you'll want to ensure whoever you choose has enough corporate resources either directly or because they are owned or backed by someone bigger, that's not likely to happen.

      Offering the type of computer independent no-lockin hardware based service (tho if you get the hardware from them, it's likely to be locked) I was after, Packet-8, CallCentric (other plans then mentioned above), ViaVoice.com, etc. Similar hardware based service but not lockin free is Lingo as I mentioned, and Vonage (they have locked stuff widely available, don't honestly know if they are standard based enough to work with unlocked or not).

      As I said, going rate is roughly $25-30/mo bottom-line, or ~$200/year prepaid (plus fees brings it to ~$230-250/year, right around $20/mo. That's for "unlimited" but consumer level calli

      --
      Duncan
      "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master,
      and if you use the program, he is your master."
      R Stallman
  39. anyone know if this works? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Anyone know if this is proven to work????

    Do you ever get those annoying phone calls with no one on the other end?

    This is a telemarketing technique where a machine makes phone calls and records the time of day when a person answers the phone.

    This technique is used to determine the best time of day for a "real" sales person to call back and get someone at home.

    What you can do after answering, if you notice there is no one there, is to immediately start hitting your # button on the phone, 6 or 7 times, as quickly as possible This confuses the machine that dialed the call and it kicks your number out of their system. Gosh, what a shame not to have your name in their system any longer !!!

  40. ADT is awful by Badmovies · · Score: 1

    This is from just before Do Not Call went into action, but ADT is really awful about telemarketing calls.

    When we bought our home, we started receiving calls from ADT trying to sell us a security system. When I say that, I mean several calls every day: Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, etc. I always followed the procedure of "No I do not want your service. Remove me from your calling list." This continued for months. After 2 months I was pretty darn angry with them. I started contacting ADT direct, each time being told it would take a little while for my "do not call me" to take effect and that it was multiple franchise owners calling me and they could do nothing about it. The last time I called, I told them on the phone that any further calls would be reported to the police as harassment and sent a registered letter stating the same. The calls stopped immediately.

    I will never purchase a security system from ADT; just based on that past experience.

    --


    Andrew Borntreger
    Champion of cinematic disasters
  41. Lost Jobs by dj245 · · Score: 1

    All these call center jobs are being offshored to India. Its tedious, boring work, with a low success rate and plenty of abuse from the people you call. Why pay Americans to do this when you can hire 4 Indians for the price of one?

    I doubt putting Americans out of work was much of a concern for the politicians. The jobs would be gone in another 5 years anyway.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  42. A better solution (seriosuly) by He+Who+Waits · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Over the past couple of years, the vast majority of telemarketing spam calls to my house have been through Predictive Dialing systems.

    When answering a call from one of these systems, you typically hear a pause while the system alerts the telemarketers that it has found a live human for them to speak to.

    Upon hearing that characteristic pause, I now simply dial 25 to instruct my Canon ImageClass multifunction laser printer to accept an incoming fax and hang up, leaving the caller to be bombarded with shrill fax tones.

    In the two months I've been doing this, the number of spam calls I get has dropped by 2/3.

    1. Re:A better solution (seriosuly) by toddestan · · Score: 1

      You might want to be careful with that technique, because if someone recognizes it as a fax machine and puts you onto a junk faxer's list, you could end up getting a whole lot of calls at all hours of the day and night.

  43. Hey mods!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Waste a mod point on me too!!!

  44. Great but Political Call are exempt by shimane · · Score: 1

    This is great, but political calls and political robo calls are exempt. There is a new Political 'do not call' registry that is fighting back against politicians calling you at home with impunity. More at: http://www.stoppoliticalcalls.org/

  45. Have fun with it by TastelessGarbage · · Score: 1

    Another poster had a great idea: Ask the telemarketer "What are you wearing?" I've tried this a few times and this does stop them in their tracks, with no followup calls.

    --
    That ain't liver; that's beef kidney!
    1. Re:Have fun with it by Dimitrii · · Score: 1

      I kept a vinyl siding telemarketer on the phone for almost a half hour once. It was before Tivo and there was nothing on. He told me that a representative of their company had been in my neighborhood and noticed the wood siding on my house. I thought that was strange as I lived in a large brick apartment building with vinyl eaves etc. I asked about durability, colors, cost, etc. He wanted to schedule an appointment but I kept asking another question and he would follow his long script about that issue. I ended it by telling him that it all sounded great and I will recommend that the owner of the complex look into covering his brick building.

  46. Telemarketing Guard by Syn+Ack · · Score: 1


    First I have to say that I work for the company that I'm talking about. Ok, now that's out of the way. Primus Canada recently launched a new service where we give the customer the ability to control telemarketing calls. Think of it like spam filtering but on telemarketing calls. This has reduced inbound Telemarketing VERY substantially for our customer base. Do not call lists are all fine and dandy but they aren't that reliable. You can learn about the feature here:

    http://www.primustel.ca/en/residential/guide/tmg/TelemarketingGuide.html

    The best call treatment is the "press 1 jail." If the number is identified as a telemarketer the telemarketer needs to "press 1" in order to reach the customer, since 99% of Telemarketers can't send any digits this effectively blackholes them. Works a charm.

    Paul

  47. No More Unwanted Calls on my Landline by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    The asterisk system on my landline prevents all sorts of stuff from getting through. My computer's connected to my landline with a linksys SIP-to-phone line converter so all the calls that come in are digital data. You immediately get dropped into a voice menu system that tells you to press 1 if you're a telemarketer and 2 otherwise. Since telemarketers inevitably are on automated systems that's as far as they get. Most wrong numbers don't get past this point, either. In fact, I don't actually remember getting one since I set this up.

    This opens the door for doing other things too. Want to charge for the right to talk to you? Set up a web page that lets them send you cash via a PayPal account or something and issue them a PIN code they can use to talk to you at that point. Want to redirect landline calls to a cellphone? With an additional phone line or a VOIP service you can do this. Least call routing is pretty easy too -- use enum or something to check to see if the phone number you're calling has a registered IP address and make a pure data call if it does. Choose plain-old-landline for local area calls or a voip service for long distance. I haven't really found a voice service I particularly like yet, but I'm hoping that they get better as time goes on (Or that everyone just starts making data calls across the Internet without getting the POTS system involved at all.)

    I wish I could do any of that on my cell phone...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  48. ColdCallBlocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah i hate cold callers, just use this nifty program to stop them from contactiong you on your telephone landlines, (ColdCallBlocker) its free and it works wonders! Best of all it has no ads and cuts down calls to few to none now days =]