Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Class-Action Suit Claims Copyright Enforcement Company Made Harassing Robo-calls

Posted by samzenpus on from the will-you-pay-us-now?-how-about-now? dept.

An anonymous reader writes Morgan Pietz, one of the lawyers who took on Prenda Law, has a new target in his sights: copyright enforcement company Rightscorp. In a class action suit (PDF) Pietz claims the company made illegal, harassing robo-calls to people who were accused of illegal downloading and by doing so Rightscorp broke the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which limits how automated calling devices can be used. "They robo-called Jeanie Reif's cell phone darn near every day for a couple of months," Pietz said. "And there could be thousands of members of this class."

42 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. DO NOT HANG UP!! by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    Can we also sue the Business Software Alliance?

    1. Re:DO NOT HANG UP!! by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      dont copy that floppy!!!!

      ....whats a floppy??!?!!!

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  2. If the FCC actually did its job by Rigel47 · · Score: 2

    and weren't a complete waste of taxpayer money these robo calls would never happen. I have for YEARS been getting the same pre-recorded message call to my cell phone promising me to lower my credit card payment. Searching the internet shows hundreds of folks complaining about the same -- down to the very spoofed caller ID number. I've filed numerous complaints online at the FTC and yet fuck all happens.

    1. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by fleebait · · Score: 1

      It sounds like a really, really good place to put the massive NSA data collection to some good useful purpose for the citizens.

      There might be some justification, after all, if we can get rid of the robocallers.

    2. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Well, there's several reasons for that ...

      1) Lobbyists for the people who claim to be "legitimate" telemarketers had provisions in the law gutted so they could continue to call us even if we didn't want them to.

      2) Since it's so trivial to spoof caller ID (in part for these exact same companies), knowing who is actually calling is almost impossible

      3) Many of those callers are calling from another country entirely (again, because those companies who lobbied for exemptions wanted to use offshore call centers) ... so what is the FCC going to do?

      You have a toothless legislation, designed to give loopholes to telemarketers and politicians (and who knows what else), which has been set up to allow 3rd party contractors to call on your behalf and spoof the caller ID, and people in another country who are doing the calling.

      Many of us believe the people doing the fraudulent calls are the exact same offshore call centers used by the "legitimate" organizations.

      The law was so crippled to protect commercial interests there's really nothing to enforce.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem with these situations is that the FCC doesn't have much control over the bulk of these callers now that the companies have learned how to game the system. Telemarketers targeting the US will have their operations calling from Canada or elsewhere, and in Canada they'll be calling from the US or elsewhere.

      It's kinda similar to how governments who are bound by law to not perform certain forms of espionage will hire it out to another nation to perform.

      Not saying this excuses it, it's just the situation that has arisen from the legislation.

    4. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by Bengie · · Score: 1

      I had this once, complained to the police department, they put a trace on my phone line and found who was calling me. I never found out who, but I stopped getting calls.

    5. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Telemarketers targeting the US will have their operations calling from Canada or elsewhere, and in Canada they'll be calling from the US or elsewhere.

      What we need is a law prohibiting telemarketing from an overseas operation to be passed in both countries, and a cooperative agreement to enforce the other country's law locally.

      And a regulation that companies which provide termination for overseas calls either refuse any call, or ensure through their contractual agreements and technology on their network that caller id will always be present and reflects a valid telephone number for the actual country of origin unique and persistent to the calling party.

    6. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I want to consider this a victory but since then 2 more telemarketers have taken their place. What kind of hydra bullshit is this??

      Hey, don't blame Hydra. Sure, they are a ruthless, evil organization dedicated to world domination but even they have standards!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    7. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The FCC is doing its job. Have you forgotten who they work for?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    8. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      You seem to be suggesting a solution in which someone will both cooperatively pass laws spanning multiple nations, and which could be construed as limiting the "free speech" and commercial activities of corporations.

      I predict the chance of that happening to be practically non-existent.

      Someone with deep pockets will claim that preventing a commercial entity from cold calling you is unfair. And they'll throw a lot of money at this to ensure those laws are watered down so far as to be useless.

      Just like the last time.

      Those laws are ineffective because people paid to make them that way.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    9. Re: If the FCC actually did its job by beltsbear · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Caller ID should not be allowed to be spoofed, ever. Make it really illegal and start to crack down on any provider that allows it to happen.

    10. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Then repeal the law and give it teeth. No exclusions for charities or politicians. if you don't want a call, you don't get a call, period. If a complaint is filed, the call will be traced back to find out who paid for it at the expense of the offending organization. Make a fine of $5,000 half of which is payable to the consumer.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    11. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Well, sure, an individual is entitled to privacy. A corporation is not. As an individual and and owner of several businesses I don't have problems with that.
      If individuals are allowed to withhold caller ID, I should also be allowed to silently refuse calls from such people as well.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    12. Re: If the FCC actually did its job by Redbehrend · · Score: 1

      They need to cracked down on tele providers they are the ones that allow spoofing. In voip setup they even let you and show you how to assign any name and number.... Like it's a feature...

    13. Re: If the FCC actually did its job by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > Exactly. Caller ID should not be allowed to be spoofed, ever. Make it
      > really illegal and start to crack down on any provider that allows it to happen.

      Caller ID is too simple. You really need to use ANI (Automatic Number Identification), which is a much more robust protocol. It is accurate because it's used for billing on telephone landlines. Only problem is that it costs money, and I don't know if you can get it on a residential account. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

      Note that I said it's used for telephone landlines. It can be defeated by using an outbound-only VOIP line.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    14. Re:If the FCC actually did its job by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You seem to be suggesting a solution in which someone will both cooperatively pass laws spanning multiple nations,

      Actually.. I guess I would rather not. Another alternative that would not require it would be to require providers impose a $1 to $5 per call termination fee for any oversea telemarketing call, regardless of whether a product successfully sold or not, and at least 25% of any extra fee collected needs to be paid to the person who was called.

      I would like to add a "Telemarketing call reporting" function, where the person who receives the call will enter a code such as "#", during the call, then if the other parties disconnects the call within 5 seconds, or the person presses "#" two more times; the call will automatically be reported as a telemarketing call requiring charging for the service.

      In this case, no extra international cooperation is required, since the person making the call terminates the call in the country they are calling, they are automatically subject to any and all fees which may be imposed for the call, and, there are already laws that will cause the originating telecom provider to pay for any and all fees that are due and not paid by the caller.

  3. Does rights-corp have anything to take? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

    These places tend to be asset-less companies that do not care about being sued, they simply form another shell and fold.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
    1. Re:Does rights-corp have anything to take? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      These places tend to be asset-less companies that do not care about being sued, they simply form another shell and fold.

      Per TFA, the lawsuit also has 10 John Doe defendants and they intend to go after the copyright holders Rightscorp represents. Given their deep pockets, if the lawsuit successfully includes them then who has what assets is moot since they all are on hook for the judgement so if one can't pay the other must.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:Does rights-corp have anything to take? by Bengie · · Score: 1

      In this case, they were a company that has public stock and got investment funding with the promise of monetary returns. The investors are not happy.

    3. Re:Does rights-corp have anything to take? by maz2331 · · Score: 1

      That's why the suit also names their clients, who are also ultimately responsible for the actions of their "agent". Those are deep-pocket record companies who DO have assets, and lots of them.

    4. Re:Does rights-corp have anything to take? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      That is a HUGE if.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
  4. Re:Copyright is turning into religion by MrMickS · · Score: 1

    Is this posted AC to avoid bringing down the wrath of the copyright god, or just because you're trolling?

    --
    You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
  5. Answering machines? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    If only we had robotic defenses against robotic phone call attacks...

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:Answering machines? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I like Google Voice for this reason. If I mark a caller as "spam", they get a message saying "This number has been disconnected." My phones don't even ring. I think Google even auto-marks numbers as spam if enough people do so. (Similar to how, if enough people mark an e-mail as spam, all further instances of that e-mail will be marked as spam.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Answering machines? by Technician · · Score: 1

      The worst debt collection practice I was hammered with, called, didn't state for who they were,, did not leave any options to complete the call from them, but only gave a call back number for Jeromy to call Bob. I'm not Jeremy, so I let it run for a couple of months to see if it would quit. It didn't. Collectors continued to call even after my new number was not so new at 8 years.

      I pity anyone who does not speak English as they wouldn't understand the message, there was no option to respond to the call, such as press any key, and it would continue until you did call in. They only quit after I called and didn't ask for Bob, but asked for their legal department. I think I shook them up a bit. Anyway the calls quit from them.

      I asked for the legal department. I then told them they can not legally disclose any debt info to third parties. Then told them of the issue with the robocall. I gave them the number they robocalled and the times. They feigned ignorance and stated it must have been forwarded to my number from another number. I then asked for the number they were using to call Jeremy and gave time stamps. They then claimed they could not release Jeremy's contact info to 3rd parties. LOL.. Nice snow job. Anyway the calls quit with threat of $50 for each additional call per the telemarketing and fair collection practices laws.

      A Google search of the number revealed the law firm in Chicago IL, their address, office phone numbers, staff names, etc. Nobody there is named Bob or Robert.

      Jeromy Taylor, Please update your contact info with your creditors. I'm tired of taking your calls.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    3. Re:Answering machines? by bswarm · · Score: 1

      I had this happen. Google the number, find an email address, send them an email that you are getting these calls but you are not the intended recipient and you do not know the person, and to stop the calls or legal action will be taken. Never got another call.

    4. Re:Answering machines? by sabbede · · Score: 1

      I just report them to the FTC. My number is on the Do Not Call list.

  6. Re:Copyright is turning into religion by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

    why not both?

  7. Citation by ProzacPatient · · Score: 2

    Very rarely do news articles saying "X is against the law" ever actually cite the law in question. The applicable law in this case, if I understand correctly, is 47 U.S.C. 227.

    1. Re:Citation by Bengie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Based on another site, the issue seems to be that this company is claiming to be able to call under the pretenses that they are a debt collector trying to collect the "debt" of paying for infringements or face a lawsuit. The problem seems to be that because this is a civil issue, there cannot be a "Debt" until they win a lawsuit. They put the carriage before the horse. They can sue, then attempt to collect debt, but not the other way around. Because there is no official debt, they are not allowed to robo call.

  8. Re:Copyright is turning into religion by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

    In a class action lawsuit (PDF) filed on Friday, Pietz says the copyright enforcement company made illegal, harassing robo-calls to his clients, who were accused of illegal downloading. The lawsuit says that Rightscorp broke the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), a 1991 law which limits how automated calling devices can be used.

    I think the key phrase is "were accused of illegal downloading." If the robo-call can prove that they are right on whatever they accuse, the case will be thrown away due to the Clean hand doctrine... The lawyer (Pietz) is relying on and hoping that the point can't be proven...

  9. Harassment and cell phones... by ruir · · Score: 1

    Last time someone harassed me calling every day, after a week, I changed the damn number. Problem solved.

    1. Re:Harassment and cell phones... by Technician · · Score: 1

      And I got issued your number. Your bill collector still calls on occasion Mr Taylor. Pay your bill!

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    2. Re:Harassment and cell phones... by ruir · · Score: 1

      Nobody said it was a bill collector. Someone else wont get your new number. Plus, you can ask the new number in someone else name.

  10. Re:Copyright is turning into religion by ruir · · Score: 1

    You are not very far from the truth. Religions and copyright issues are about power and control from global corporations on establishing a worldwide feudalism culture

  11. Re:Copyright is turning into religion by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

    I think the key phrase is "were accused of illegal downloading." If the robo-call can prove that they are right on whatever they accuse, the case will be thrown away due to the Clean hand doctrine... The lawyer (Pietz) is relying on and hoping that the point can't be proven...

    No, the lawyer (Pietz) is relying on the fact that he is a trained lawyer and you are not.

    The Clean-hands doctrine is something that a court might use if a party were requesting an equitable remedy. That means, in legal matters, that a party is seeking specific performance of an agreement, an injunction, payment of the value of services rendered when there was no specific contract with an agreed price, etc.

    The clean-hands doctrine does not allow the court to deny rights and legal remedies -- like the remedy in 47 U.S.C. 227(b)(3) of $500 for each violation -- that are specified by statute enacted by the government.

    If you think that simply because the other guy has "dirty hands" the only thing you need to worry about is whether a government agency decides that you've crossed a line, you are sorely mistaken. Your lawyer will eventually explain that to you. You will not like it.

  12. You people still don't get it. by Jawnn · · Score: 1

    Regulations, like the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, are for little people. This is about corporate profit and we will decide which regulations we will observe and which we will ignore. And if you don't like it, by your own legislators and regulators.

    Regards,
    Your Friends at RIAA/MPAA

  13. Re:Until... by ruir · · Score: 1

    Blocking numbers? Good luck. It is trivial to call as anonymous. You can opt for not answering, but it still rings.

  14. Re:Until... by ruir · · Score: 1

    ha, and I forgot. Here it is mandatory to wait 2 years until a disposed number is given to someone else. Granted, they do not always honour that law.

  15. Redundancy by Livius · · Score: 1

    "...harassing robo-calls..."

    Also known as 'robo-calls'.

  16. Good! by sabbede · · Score: 1
    I got a number of harassing calls from them. All for the US Serviceman who previously had my phone number.

    Time and time again I explained to them that I wasn't the person they were looking for. Then I'd launch into a tirade about their business practices - which I'm glad to see they have been called on.