Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Government Accuses Sprint of Overcharging For Wiretapping Expenses

Posted by Unknown on from the funding-unfunded-mandates dept.

realized writes with news that the Federal government thinks Sprint overcharged them $21 million when billing for wiretaps. From the article: "Sprint, like all the nation's carriers, must comply with the Communications Assistance in Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which requires telcos to be capable of providing government-ordered wiretapping services. The act also allows carriers to recoup 'reasonable expenses' associated with those services. Sprint inflated charges approximately 58 percent between 2007 and 2010, according to a lawsuit the administration brought against the carrier today. ... The suit said that the wireless carrier breached Federal Communications Commission guidelines of 2006 that prohibited carriers from using intercept charges to recover costs of modifying 'equipment, facilities or services' to comply with the Communications Assistance in Law Enforcement Act."

12 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Well, at least... by Bin_jammin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the government now gets to experience the same bill-creep the rest of us poor suckers have been subject to all this time.

    1. Re:Well, at least... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

      Government: [wags finger] Have you no shame? Have you no respect for the law?
      Sprint: [rubs nipples] I'm sorry sir, perhaps you should switch to another provider to snoop on our customers. Ooohh! That's not possible is it? - we're the only game in town.

    2. Re:Well, at least... by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obviously they should just cancel their account and sign up again as a new customer.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    3. Re:Well, at least... by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You misunderstand... This has nothing to do with the special unconstitutional "buy the board new gold-plated helicopters and we'll looks the other way for 15 minutes while your techs play in our server room" spying on American citizens.

      This involves the run-of-the-mill unconstitutional "We spy on you plebes, suck it" police spying that the telecoms have to support per some random BS rights-stripping law from a decade or so back.

      Easy to mix them up, but do try to keep up with which TLA has fucked you today, it matters which organization has to throw your complaint away!


      / Well, at least someone in the government listens - If not necessarily quite how we want...

  2. clearly breached by zlives · · Score: 4, Insightful

    well at least they didn't do anything illegal like wiretap the whole nation without cause or warrant.

  3. Re:Refund on overhearing my pizza order by penix1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What I don't get is why there is an FCC ruling forbidding telcos from being able to bill the government for modifications to their equipment to comply with the law?!?!? So it basically comes down to an unfunded mandate probably passed down to the very customers the government is spying on.

    --
    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.
  4. Overages by Oysterville · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should have kept better track of their usage. They could have upgraded to a plan with more included wiretaps, or even considered one of the "Shared Family Wiretap" plans.

  5. I love it! by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I just love it when one crook accuses another crook of being crooked.

    As George Carlin would say, "Now THAT'S entertainment!"

  6. I'm not surprised by wjcofkc · · Score: 3, Informative

    As I currently battle my own Sprint bill, none of this surprises me. I'll bet the government didn't notice the enormous surcharges on their bill. I know someone who worked in their billing\customer service department. They said the level of billing abnormalities they saw was astonishing. This person had to give money to most people calling in about their bill while correcting things and promising it wouldn't happen again. When this person considered the millions who never looked at their bills and who were probably being sometimes overcharged, this person quit out of moral dilemma.

    The way they do billing is understandably complicated for many. If the government had just called in for a $21 million credit, they might have received it after an escalation or two.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
  7. Re:Refund on overhearing my pizza order by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tea is not an acronym. Why are you spelling it in all caps?

    Also, WTF are you trying to say? That they don't like "taxing your local business," or they don't like "outsourcing the cost of law enforcement to the private sector," or both?

    It sure seems like your hatred of whatever you think the tea party is, is getting in the way of any rational argument.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  8. Illegal Illegals by pubwvj · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So the government is telling us that it is illegal to over charge for an illegal service provided. Hmm...

  9. I find the entire premise to be ludicrous by Otis+B.+Dilroy+III · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are they somehow expecting honor among thieves?