FTC Moves up "Do Not Call" List Registration

tbase writes "AdAge.com has an article about the new FTC "Do-Not-Call" List which will be opening for registrations earlier than previously announced. The FTC Press Release says online registration will be available "on or around July 1." and that "Companies will face an $11,000 fine for each telemarketing call that violates the FTC's new consumer-protection provisions.""

11,000 dollar fine?

[huckda]

Would be nice if it went directly to the individual(s) they phoned instead of into some politician's pocket.

Age of "Don't Bug Me"??

[baloo914]

we encoutered several evolutionary steps in the last few hundred years. "age of reason", "industrial revolution", etc.

with the dawn of spam email officially being attacked and now the phone solicitors, are we stumbling upon the "age of stop bugging me" or the "age of leave me alone, I don't need more sexual stamina"??

Useless

[krray]

There HAVE BEEN "Do not call" lists for many years.
The phone still rings.

There HAVE BEEN "Do not mail" lists for many years.
I get more and more junk mail.

We all know how many "Do not email" lists exists.
Regardless of action the spam keeps coming.

How about a "STAY OUT OF MY FACE AND GET A REAL JOB/LIFE" list to cover everything. Damn, my doorbell just rang, I bet somebody wants to witness with me something about their God...

My Problem with This

[moehoward]

Telemarketers do not follow current law. Very rarely do I get them to tell me their name or company name, let alone a manager name or address. 80% of them hang up when I ask to be placed on their DNC list.

If they don't follow the law now, why will they follow it in the future.

And in terms of the phone companies, they see the law and fines as just another expense in a risk/reward scenario. Slamming has been illegal for many year, but they still do it because the fines do not match the profit they get from it.

This sounds like a great opportunity, but put me down as a skeptic. If the courts don't swat it down, then it will be simply ignored. The governments (local/state/federal) won't/can't enforce existing law.

I get up to 10 calls a day. I'm sick of it. My phone and my e-mail has been confiscated by marketers of crap that less then .05% of the population wants or needs.

Also, beware of the following: After this law takes effect, people will be out to get you to put your phone number on all sorts of things (product registration, checks, etc.) because the fine print will say that by giving your phone number, you waive your DNC status with them and their partners. Guard your phone number and e-mail address like you (should) guard your SSN.

Coprorate Influence?

[cnmill]

Wonder how much this is being backed by large corporations with the desired effect of choking off smaller copetitors with smaller marketing budgets?

Re:Why $11,000?

[cmburns69]

In business and politics, money talks. When you fine a corporation, you have to get them to notice. If the fine were small, the law would be ignored.

I believe a large part of this money is supposed to go back into keeping the DNC database running.

And yes, I work for a business in the industry (well, teleresearch, but still annoying)

Re:11,000 dollar fine?

[gwernol]

Would be nice if it went directly to the individual(s) they phoned instead of into some politician's pocket.

But that would, sadly, create an enormous incentive for people to make false and misleading accusations against telemarketers in order to get the fine money - which is a significant amount. The last thing you want the legal system doing is encouraging illegal activity...

Maybe not...

[PseudoThink]

I think they'd be opening a nasty can of worms if the general public had a financial motive to get telemarketers to call them. Scenario: you and a friend get jobs as telemarketers, then purposely call each others houses 50 times a day just to rack up profits from the fines.

Considering we want this system to actually work (creates potential for a similar anti-spam system in the future), it's probably best to keep the system well-designed.

Catch 22

[Brad1138]

I hate telemarketing as much as the next person and am glad to see this list. But I am a satellite Dish installer, I work for a co. that subcontracts for about a dozen different companies. Our biggest client is a telemarketing firm, they probably supply about 25% of our jobs. I would hate to lose that much business. The one thing I repeatedly hear from their customers is "I have been thinking of doing this (get Satellite) for a while now". It seems some people need a push or are too lazy to go the story and check things out.

Re:Do-Not-Mail

[GreyOrange]

So direct marketing asocciation gets all this money to sell my mail address, then asks for five more dollars to remove it...that makes sense?

It's better that is goes to the government.

[MongooseCN]

That way the government is more likely to enforce the law. If it was up to an individual to enforce it, they would have to spend most of the 11,000$ as attorny fees bringing the telemarketer to court. Not to mention the waste of time and effort. The government on the other hand will go in an all out frenzy after these people, especially after Bush's tax cut, and the government has a lot more power behind it than the average Joe.

Re:Nice!

[nherc]

Well, this is a sort of caller ID that spits the telemarketers a canned message if there number is on the phone companies list.

I wouldn't feel safe not answering all of the "Out of Area" and "Unknown" calls... who knows maybe it's your wife from a pay phone after her car broke down. Shaite happens.

Re:11,000 dollar fine?

[anthony_dipierro]

Here's the thing. You set up the list. Then you advertise the fact that you have the list. Then you set up a mechanism to have people report violations. Then set up an investigation team to investigate these reports. Hire a bunch of agents to make arrests and provide them with guns and bullet-proof vests. Now hire the lawyer to do the prosecution and all the appeals. Now hire another lawyer to get a garnishment or lien or whatever it takes to collect the money. Then you can have the $11,000.

I don't have a problem with this law. But only if it pays for itself. I'm not willing to have my taxes go up just so I have a few less hangups on my answering machine.

Also, $11,000 isn't too bad, but $11,000 per call is just ridiculous.

Be nice

[avandesande]

I simply say 'I am not interested' and hang up. They do not call back. Believe it or not, you are doing these people a favor, if they really believe that you won't buy anything, they won't bother you again. If you try to be polite or reason with them you are leading them on... These people are just trying to make a buck.

What is so hard about hanging up?

[dbavirt]

I don't understand why we need a law about this. If somebody calls you and you don't want to talk to them, just *hang up*. Easy. Simple. No legislation. No arguments over who got the 11k for the offense. No tax payer dollars wasted. And really, you aren't offending the sales drone on the other end of the line. I screen my calls with an answering machine. This technology has been around for, I would guess, decades, and cost me about $50. I have a very short message on it, and everyone who we want to talk to knows that they need to leave a message. I incur ZERO annoyance from telemarketers, unless you count the amusement at having them try to have a conversation with my answering machine.

Re:My Problem with This

[pdhenry]

The fine print is: any company with which you have done business in the last year (2 years?) can call you even if your name's on the DoNotCall list. So by including your number on the registration you implicitlt/explicitly have given the OK for them to call.

Re:Do-Not-Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

no, i don't like spam either, but people are going to contact you however you expose your self

Got it. So it's perfectly fine with you if I market my insomnia cure by standing outside your house at 3 am with a bullhorn capable of producing heavy metal concert volume levels. After all, I'm in the public street. I have a right to free speech. And you MIGHT need an insomnia cure.

Re:Doesn't matter, most calls from India now

[DougMackensie]

MCI isn't responsible, but the marketing company (it is at least a skeleton company) who routes the phone calls is responsible for the fines. All the Indian telemarketing companies route their phone calls through the internet to a US based call center. You didn't think they'd really pay for the long distance did you ;)

Re:Why $11,000?

[anthony_dipierro]

How about spending the revenue from the fines on a series of public-service announcements and ads reminding people that the best prevention for these things is for them to produce no results?

Please... Don't we have enough lies on the television. Smoking pot causes terrorism and signing up for free newspaper trials causes telephone solicitation! Maybe we should have a commercial about how staying with abusive husbands causes spousal abuse too.

The best prevention is a strictly enforced law.

The big problem with spam, telemarketers, et al is that every now and then someone actually does buy something and encourages them.

No, the big problem with spam, telemarketers, et al is that they're annoying! The reason they exist is not because someone buys something. The reason they exist is because there's a new idiot looking to make money fast born every minute.

Re:Do-Not-Mail

[Zemran]

Why not just send GBII an anonymous letter saying that all Spammers are really agents of Al Qaeda and wait for the war?

Re:Nice!

[feldsteins]

The main problem with caller ID is that it often works like this:

1. Phone company charges you for a great new service allowing you to see who's calling, thus eliminating the need to speak with telemarketers.

2. Phone company charges telemarketers for the ability to mask their number from the caller ID units.

3. Phone company charges you for a new ANTI-anti-missle....

and so on.

Re:Nice!

[nherc]

Okay, so she forgets her cellphone or the battery is dead and you go about your business forgetting to check the message after seeing it's "Unavailable". :)

Point being... just because you came up with "solutions" to that problem doesn't mean you'll never miss an important or wanted call just going by the CallerID.

Re:Do-Not-Mail

[acidrain69]

capitalism does work in practice if left to work. this freaking governement interference in the market just wacks everything up and gives the public the impression that the gov't does really do something for them while raping all other rights and freedoms outlined in the constiution.

You had barely started talking and already your point falls apart. Monopoly practices? Indentured Servitude? Anti-union practices? Environmental laws? These are all things that are in place because of government.

guess what, if you don't give people a channel to contact you, they won't. go home and stay inside. stay off the internet and don't get the mail. disconnect your phone and get rid of the cable tv. hell dig a hole in the ground and crawl inside. it's your land you s/b free to do that. people won't come knocking on the entrance of your underground hole to "bother" you or steal your precious resources.

no, i don't like spam either, but people are going to contact you however you expose your self for contact. email, annoying phone calls, door visits, time share sharks while on vacations. they're all after you and your precious dollar and everything you do to thwart them away will make them find another way to come after your precious dollar.

I don't pay $35 a month for phone service so I can have a way for people to spam me acoustically. I don't pay $60 for net service so I can get even MORE advertisements for penis enlarging. It's like going in to a store to browse. Maybe I don't want to buy anything, or I'm looking for something specific that they don't have. I don't continuously walk IN and OUT of the store browsing, I do it ONCE and leave. I don't need 50 emails for home mortgages or penis enlarging, or 20 emails for the SAME DAMN PORN SITE, in the SAME DAMN LAYOUT. They could at LEAST try to change the format of the email the next time around.

when it's a p2p network it's ok to allow unregulated use, some of which might be ok, some might not. when it's a phone network, or an email communication channel, we want to the gov't to protect our rights all to hell? if you don't want spam; don't use email.

Since when did I agree to be a marketting target? It would be one thing if remove-me-from-further-emails links actually WORKED, because I would just remove myself.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Logistics ...

[smartin]

Because they Fucking called you and invaded your privacy and peace. Thats why

Re:Do-Not-Mail

[maxpublic]

Except that:

- it's my phone and I'm paying for the service. With that in mind it's perfectly reasonable to assume that I get to decide who gets to call. If I tell someone to fuck off, then they better damn well fuck off.

- it's my email and my internet access. I get to decide to can send me mail using the services *I* pay for. In a capitalist society this is a perfectly reasonable expectation. Only a communist motherfucker would insist that I give everyone equal time on *my* dime.

- it's my mailbox and it's my postal service. The postal service does not belong to spammers, nor do I have any recognizable alternative to said post office. One would think, given no alternatives other than the government agency that I supposedly control as a citizen of the United States, I could dictate an end to spam. Funny, I can't.
And, by the way, you are *required* to have a receptacle on your property for mail delivery. This is a *law*. Funny thing, that.

- most of all, it's *my* time. Neither you nor anyone else has any business wasting it unless you're willing to pay whatever fee I set. This too is good capitalism; in fact, excellent capitalism.

Unfortunately for all of us, capitalism has very little to do with 21st century America. It had little to do with America prior to the 21st century, but even less so now. If we lived in a truly capitalist society I'd actually have the rights I listed above, as a logical extension of the free market. If anything, I'd have even more rights, provided by the tooth-and-nail competition of competing services all tripping over themselves to steal away customers, with the elimination of harrassment by low-life scumbags as a selling point for those services.

Max

Re:Logistics ...

[SuperDuG]

Yes, they interrupt you at inconvenient times, but that doesn't give you the right to harass them. ... Annoying or not, people still have to make a living.

You can't go down to McDonalds and start harassing the cashiers there, so why should telemarketers be any different.

How is it different? Because I have to GO to Mc Donalds, somewhere that I don't hold sacred as my own, and something I would do as my own choice. These people call MY house, they aren't doing it because they are "making a living", they're doing it because they're no talent ass clowns who have nothing more to offer society than sitting on their ass trying to peddle shit wares.

They want to invade my home then they will feel my wrath, they are an unwanted intruder into my comfort zone and I will treat them accordingly. Since I also take pleasure in tormenting their little souls to the point that they want to reach out and cry, I want them to call. It's a double edge sword, I don't want to be bothered by them, but if I'm bored I will certainly take the time to just mess with their heads every chance I get.

Obviously you are or know someone who is a telemarketer. Let me get you in on a little secret, once you work telemarketing you are no longer human, you are the scum of the earth and deserve nothing more than a strong kick upside the head and to be placed in the middle of a desert to slowly rot in the sun of dehydration and heat exhuation. Deserving for worthless pond scum as those who work telemarketing.

Re:I don't understand organizations fighting this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, in many cases, the telemarketer is getting paid by another company for calls made, even if no sale occurred. Sure, they may get paid more if they make a sale, but if they still get some amount just for making the call, that's still a profit. So it's to their advantage to call you, even though they are pretty sure you won't buy anything.

Please do not.

[autechre]

If you abuse this system, then you will be giving ammunition to the telemarketing companies, possibly resulting in the list going away. I, for one, will be more than happy to simply add my own number to this list and be done with it. Let everyone see that it works exactly as intended.

Re:Catch 22

[Rude Turnip]

It's your company's responsibility to make sure it has a diversified client base. Your company created that risk and will have to live with it until it gets more business.

Re:Useless

[FrEaK7782]

The hard part is when you attempt to be polite. If you aren't rude and hang up on them, they take that as a "Ya! Send me a bunch of shit for $100's". I was polite to one guy. He didn't even ask if I was interested. Because I hadn't hung up on him he started putting my information in to the computer to send some "free" trial.

If the telemarketers acted like decent human beings and followed some phone etiquette, a simple "No thanks" would work. But most of them don't accept that. They keep going "but why don't you want it? it's free!". Bastards...

Do not call at work?

[LinuxInDallas]

I get phone calls daily from people trying to get me to sign up for trade journals and people trying to get me to sign up for their credit cards. It's a big time waster. Questions is, would this do-not-call list work for a business? Or would that somehow mean that other legitimate but unsolicited calls would not be allowed? For instance, a semiconductor company rep that is just calling to check up on things.

Create specific legal forms of advertising.

[kaltkalt]

And ban the rest.

We should only allow advertising to be done in certain places/manners. For example print ads in publications of general circulation, television commercials, product placement in places that consent (presumably for a fee), billboards, vehicular ads (bumper stickers, airplanes towing signs), banner (but not popup) ads on websites, and... that's all. All other forms of advertising, especially "direct marketing," should be illegal, and punishable by prison terms. Their annoyance outweighs the value they provide society. I yearn for the day that the Direct Marketing Association is a criminal organization, delegated to the likes of NABLA.

Commercial speech can be highly regulated, so as long as the message (buy my product!) can get out, there's no first amendment problem per se.

If I have not asked you about your product, you have no right to tell me about it. If it's good and I want it, I'll find out about it and possibly buy it. Word of mouth is the only truly legitimate form of advertising.

I concede that I'm quite radical on this issue. I despise all marketing. As Bill Hicks said... if you are in marketing, kill yourself. ("ooh, he's going for the anti-marketing dollar, clever!")

that is correct

[Trepidity]

Punitive damages should go to the state -- they are intended to prevent the company from doing something again, and so there's no reason the person injured deserves them. Actual damages should of course still go to the person who suffered the damages, but you shouldn't be able to get rich off personal injury lawsuits, for exactly the reasons mentioned in this thread.

Typical Telemarketing

[zakezuke]

We would like to give you a free edition of the newspaper
no thanks, get a free one online please remove me from your list

We would like to replace your auto glass on your windshild
No thanks, I down own a car. Please remove me from your list.

We would like to replace your existing windows with vinyl ones
No thanks I prefer glass. Please remove me from your list.

But vinyl windows make your home look pretty
I don't own a home. Please remove me from your list.

We notice that you recently refinanced your home
I don't own home. Please remove me from your list

We are accepting donations for this organization household items
This is isn't a house, it's a tiki hut. Please remove me from your list.

We would like to save you on auto insurance
Don't own a car. Please remove me from your list

We are accepting donations for this worthy cause
I don't donate over the phone [isolated cases they get my moolah already] Please remove me from your list

We want to offer you a free home security system
Don't own a home, please remove me from the list

But we can install it in your apartment
no you can't, I won't let you please remove me from your list

But there have been alot of break ins in your area, you need one
Yes, and those breakins those people who purchaced your system

But why would anyone turn down our free home security system
Because some people actually make their purchacing choices based on product research rather then impulse buying. Accepting your free product locks the person into a service contract and no one with one gram of sence would do that without doing any form of research. Additional, i'm not going to give license to some guy who I don't know to drill holes in my walls without there being a legit contract for the install. If I choose your service, and you guys fuck up, I want you to pay to have it fixed. You are not qualified to answer any logical question because the company you work for doesn't even give you paperwork or a model number of what you are selling. Your sales staff who will knock on my door are not welcome, I don't want to speak to them. Please remove me from your list, I have not accepted your free product for 7 years. Please give up and find someone else to bug

I would THINK after repeated failures they would take the hint and actually remove me from the list. I'm not profitable to telemarketers, I don't buy crap sold to me over the phone.