Slashdot Mirror
DOJ and 4 States Want $24 Billion In Fines From Dish Network For Telemarketing (arstechnica.com)
walterbyrd writes: The DOJ as well as Ohio, Illinois, California, and North Carolina say that Dish disregarded federal laws on call etiquette. US lawyers are asking for $900 million in civil penalties, and the four states are asking for $23.5 billion in fines, according to the Denver Post. 'Laws against phoning people on do-not-call lists and using recorded messages allow penalties of up to $16,000 per violation,' the Post added.
The first amendment right is a right to speak. Its not a right to force others to listen.
No first amendment rights are being violated here. There is a do not call list that people opt into that means "This person does not wish to recieve your phone calls". If you think that allowing people to be forced into hearing others speech is OK, then fine, but lets not pretend that position is about defending rights.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
The difference is that telemarketing steals your time in a way you can't reallocate. It's a much more significant intrusion than junk mail, and much more inconsiderate. And it is used much more frequently by very disreputable companies who hide caller IDs, refuse to give you real addresses, pretend to have preexisting relationships with you, etc...
Basically the sheer quantity of fraud combined with the much greater intrusion make it an appropriate area for regulation. The phone companies should be preventing it but don't. So long as the phone companies won't, governments should.
The First Amendment guarantees a voice, but does not guarantee a platform. The fines for ignoring the DNC list are not for speaking; they are for violating the DNC list.
Lawyers can get a cut of lawsuits. These $$ are fines. Fines go directly to the government.
But you're right that the people who were most affected won't see a penny.
The first amendment does not cover their use of my resources (my phone line) to convey their speech. They tie up my resources to do their speech. As soon as this is not the case, we can talk about their freedom of speech.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
That's fine, too. One less annoyance in the world is already a good outcome.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Nail 'em to the wall, boys.
Ain't nobody got time for telemarketer calls.
I don't care if the fine money goes to ISIS, better them than telemarketers allowed to roam free in parks where there are unattended children. Bastards.
moox. for a new generation.
There is a serious collective action problem here. Between caller ID spoofing, robo-calling, callers refusing to identify their company or who they are calling on behalf of, and outright fraud, it is all but impossible to establish a TCPA violator's identity well enough to stand up in court, and then it is practically impossible to enforce any judgment. The time and effort it takes to win money is more costly for most people than what they could collect in a civil case.
It isnt impossible. If someone wanted to they could identify these companies. The phone companies don't want to bother though. They have the technology though.
"Although I recognize that telemarketing can be annoying, it's a form of speech."
Telemarketing is speech in the same way that mugging is a display of affection.
You totally sound like a schill for telemarketers.
So, it's fine they're going after a big company for being robocall jerks.
I get a bunch of these calls every week and... it's never once been Dish. It's always these sleazy scam operations with "Stop what you're doing I can make you ten thousand bucks" or "The FBI says there's a break-in every 8 minutes." I know it's only anecdotal, but no one I know who complains about annoying robocalls has ever mentioned Dish, it's always scammers.
I don't doubt that Dish has abused their phone privileges. But while this (unrealistic) fine in the tens of billions of dollars is big headlines for these AGs, maybe before they tear a ligament patting themselves on the back, they could also do some (less glamorous but more impactful) work against these mom and pop scam outfits?
Nothing posted to
We so need a corporate death penalty. This isn't quite the case for it to be used but, it should certainly exist. Also, if the corporation is sentenced to death, all of the C-level executives should have an automatic prison sentence that can be enhanced for their crimes.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
But if the Republicans rulers of a corporation hire thousands of co-conspirators to call the people in order to prevent us from communicating by calling us and tieing up our communication devices thus not allowing us to communicate, then they have taken our voice. They are taking our voice.
Actually, Congress has written all of these laws to make an exception for... Congress. Political fundraisers can call you all they want.
Some of this is cat and mouse... whatever system is used to identify them is circumvented, when that circumvention no longer works a new one is devised. If a company gets nailed badly enough, they declare bankruptcy and continue on in another corporation using slightly improved evasion methods.
I put a corporate death penalty up on the whitehouse.gov petitions a couple years ago. Got something like 3 signatures. It was even less popular than the one where I suggested that members of Congress should be required to use VA hospitals until the problems with VA hospitals are solved. A couple veterans I know were pretty gung-ho for that one.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The fine for a bank failing should be the bank failing. The "bailout" should be given to depositors (there was even an existing mechanism for that, the FDIC), not to the institution that lost the funds. But no, apparently we live in an age where mediocrity and incompetence is rewarded and excellence is restricted. Cos you'll just make the rest of us look bad, ya know?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Fines shouldn't go to the government. That's what causes things like corrupt cities setting up speed traps when they have a budget shortfall.
Fines for violations against the public should go into a government fund. And every year when every taxpayer files their taxes, they get a proportional share out of that fund; either as a tax credit or a refund. That way the money goes back directly to the public.
Customers, no. They're innocent victims.
Stockholders, however, are like the owner of a vicious dog who refuses
to take responsibility for the dog's behavior.
The current approach of "Well, I talked to the dog and I think he understands and I've paid the fine.
Besides, the toddler was trespassing." just doesn't cut it.
Actually, that's a kind of press, the mechanical means of mass producing and distributing speech, specifically protected in the First Amendment alongside Speech itself. Modern courts have added "The Press"-qua-job-description, but the real reason is kings would backdoor censor by outlawing or controlling printing presses.
Indeed, there is a push on to do away with "The Press" job description, and being a "member" of "The Press" is synonymous with any citizen doing anything press-like, like picking up a cell phone camera or posting on Facebook. There is no special subset of citizens permitted greater freedom of speech than others.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
For that bit, I was thinking basically an administrative law judge or a panel at the FCC, where their main job is to adjudicate cases like this, and so they can have streamlined accesses to relevant databases -- for example, I say "I got unsolicited calls at 9:15 on day A, 10:43 on day B", and so forth, and they can confirm with my telco that those calls were made, and get details about the callers that my carrier might not give me. If those details sustain my claim of TCPA violations, this judge or panel could award damages.