U.S. Court Blocks Anti-Telemarketing List 1087
DirkDaring writes "Yahoo is reporting that a U.S. court in Oklahoma has blocked the national 'do not call' list that would allow consumers to stop most unwanted telephone sales calls. With around 50 million phone numbers currently signed up this could get very messy."
Alternate Story (Score:3, Informative)
And their web address is... (Score:4, Informative)
Idea not dead (Score:5, Informative)
Re:That took real guts... (Score:3, Informative)
Another Alternate Story... (Score:3, Informative)
A similar article with a little more (Score:5, Informative)
A nice quote from that article:
Gee, I guess that never occurred to them before this list was created. Now that it has occurred to them, any bets on if they'll actually respect those wishes?Judges contact info: (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.okwd.uscourts.gov/west.htm [uscourts.gov]
You know what to do.
Telemarketing in OK (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.state.ok.us/osfdocs/budget/table1.pd
At least Walmart has more employees.
Re:congressional authority (Score:4, Informative)
.pdf of the court's order (Score:4, Informative)
Re:And their phone number is... (Score:5, Informative)
DMA contact information (Score:2, Informative)
legal sidestepping aside... (Score:2, Informative)
I just called his chambers... (Score:4, Informative)
I spoke to a nice lady, told her the gist of my second paragraph above (redacting the personal comments) and that the judge had overstepped HIS authority. I warned her to expect a lot of calls.
She asked me for my name and phone number....
Re:Details of the court (Score:4, Informative)
Chambers Page for The Honorable Lee R. West [uscourts.gov]
Chambers Page for
The Honorable Lee R. West
Senior United States District Judge
Western District of Oklahoma
U.S. Courthouse
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140
Chambers Facsimile: 405-609-5151
Re:That took real guts... (Score:4, Informative)
District Judges aren't really political creatures. Once they're appointed, they're there for life, and their ONLY politicking is jockying for a seat on the Apellate Circuit or the Supreme Court.
For the uninformed about how the courts work: the Telemarketers got a very good lawyer, and got lucky.
Free Speech issue (Score:3, Informative)
Except the Supreme Court has already held that commercial speech doesn't have the same protection as individual speech. The question is probably going to end back up in the Supreme Court as it's not clear how much latitiude Congress has in a case like this.
As annoying as telemarketing calls are, they do serve a function. Just because 50 million people believe that they shouldn't have to be bothered saying "I'm not interested." doesn't necessarily mean Congress can shut the industry down. Clearly, somebody is interested otherwise the calls wouldn't keep coming.
Re:I am confused... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And their web address is... (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.the-dma.org/aboutdma/contactthedma.sht
I wonder how they'd like to get 50 million emails & phone calls telling them to go fsck themselves...
Re:You know what I don't understand? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not sure how I feel about that call machine they use, that puts in a delay before talking to a real person; on the one hand I'm dismayed at the increase in effeciency, on the other hand I'm greatful that I can so often sneak a hangup into there...
Re:Telemarketing in OK (Score:2, Informative)
Is it just me, or has Oklahoma done some weird things lately?
And they want you to Contact the DMA... (Score:4, Informative)
- "The DMA is a membership organization." Interesting fact.
- "We are here to help you." Good, because I need help right now- my blood pressure is up after reading this article.
- "You can reach us by mail, phone, fax or e-mail at the following addresses:"
And then follows a list of over 30 contacts [the-dma.org]. I wonder who could help... "Consumer assistance"? No, I never consume their products (although they try to force feed everyone) so that isn't me. Privacy? That probably goes to an overfilled voicemail. How about "Direct Marketing Educational Foundation"? That could work- I certainly think that Direct Marketing needs more education.Re:Free Speech issue (Score:3, Informative)
Congress isn't shutting down the industry. They're only saying that you can't call the people who have officially declared they don't want to be called. If the DMA had any integrity, they'd be fighting hard for this bill to pass, since it prevents them from wasting their time on people who have already declared they don't want what's being offered. But since the DMA companies make money from the people who are too timid to hang up on marketers, they need to be stopped by something stronger than self-policing.
Re:That took real guts... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And their web address is... (Score:4, Informative)
(1) Infocision
http://www.infocision.com/commercial_
Want more information about InfoCision's teleservices outsourcing capabilities? You can contact us using one of the following methods:
By phone
Todd Grable, Sr. Vice President - Marketing
330-668-1400
(2) Global Contact Services
http://www.gcsagents.com/gcsweb/gcs%20w
What's the GCS advantage? We've assembled a team of Call Center industry
experts and have built a company fully focused on our clients. If you're
looking for experience and expertise, look no further than GCS. We're
The Right Call.
Want more information? Please contact: Benny Callahan EVP, Sales
Phone: (704) 782-0596
E-mail: benny.callahan@gcsagents.com
(3) Chartered Benefit Services, Inc.
http://www.charteredbenefit.com/
Need more information?
If you are a financial institution and would like information about
partnering with us, please call (847) 797-8500
Our address is:
315 W. University Drive,
Arlington Heights, IL 60004
Re:That took real guts... (Score:3, Informative)
Especially when a mere 50,996,116 [cnn.com] votes elected Al Gore president in 2000.
I guess the courts don't always care about numbers.
Here's the # for the American Teleservices Assoc. (Score:2, Informative)
American Teleservices Association
1666 K Street, NW, Suite 1200
Washington, DC 20006
Toll Free: (877) 779-3974
info@ataconnect.org
Re:A case of logic? (Score:3, Informative)
Telemarketers often* sell products to individuals who have a very, very poor image of telemarketers, and are firmly resolved not to buy anything.
Maybe not you and me, but 90% of America. You have to understand, they have a very, very, very low positive response rate, but an extremely high call volume. I worked in a survey firm, and our response rate was something abysmal---like 1 in 60. Focus groups were notably better, but my friends who worked across the street at MCI or Access Direct got maybe a 1 in 200 response rate.
Didn't matter. Those autodialers are quick.
You see, part of the 'training' they give you is how to push products on to unsuspected clients. "Tell us how much your phone service costs". Or even worse (this one really pisses me off), "Give us your address and billing information so we can reduce your long distance rates". Or another terrible one: "We need your billing information to update your credit protection service".
Pressure, Pressure, Pressure, and all of a sudden, the poor sap on the other end of the line is tired of saying no, and they just purchase the thing that marketer is trying to sell, just so they don't have to be rude.
I thought it was bad at my research firm. I couldn't believe that crap that went down at MCI, comissions included.
I used to fall prey to this kind of crap before. I remember a set of ten magazine prescriptions, which were supposedly only $10 a month, which actually became $40 a month (because I was being charged in advance), and of which 6 of the magazines never came through.
Evil, blooding sucking, pus-filled bastards.
The only way to deal with these people is to tell them to shut the fuck up, stop calling your number, and find a real job.
I felt bad doing survey research on blood glucose measuring devices, and video game focus groups. The telemarketers out there have made a concious decision to get a higher paying, commission based job, fleecing people out of their money.
You don't have to be nice to them. In fact, they probably say really horrible things about you to their coworkers after they get off the phone with you.
But as long as 1 out of 200 American's do not have the backbone to stand up to them it will make sense for them keep racking up the calls---even out of a database such as the do not call list.
The FCC has approved this. (Score:5, Informative)
That's either going to be overturned on appeal, or the FCC and FTC will work out some organizational way to deal with it.
Even with the judge's ruling, the do-not-call registry should still apply to businesses directly regulated by the FCC, such as telephone companies.
Re:A plan that worked once... (Score:3, Informative)
If Alexander Graham Bell could see us now (Score:4, Informative)
Re:His Chambers Phone Number (Score:3, Informative)
correction... (Score:3, Informative)
It's unrestricted if you have the $7200 per year required to download it.
It is *not* a free download, something that has gotten little publicity. It's only free to charities and pollsters and the like. Companies are required to purchase it, at a cost of $25 per area code, up to a maximum of around $7300.
While I'm a fan of the idea, I was surprised to learn about the costs involved. I love the idea of a do not call list, but using it as a way to tax telemarking calls just seems a bit shady.
Re:Free Speech (Score:2, Informative)
[June 28, 2000]
Majority opinion, delivered by Justice Stevens:
>> The unwilling listener's interest in avoiding unwanted communication has been repeatedly identified in our cases. It is an aspect of the broader "right to be let alone" that one of our wisest Justices characterized as "the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." Olmstead v. United States, 277 U. S. 438, 478 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting).24 The right to avoid unwelcome speech has special force in the privacy of the home, Rowan v. Post Office Dept., 397 U. S. 728, 738 (1970), and its immediate surroundings, Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U. S., at 485, but can also be protected in confrontational settings.
That covers all the cases above except for number 5. In that case, assuming the WTO officials include US political leaders, I believe that the right to express one's views to one's political leaders may prevail. See http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=
IANAL, but I can use google and quote things.
Re:A plan that worked once... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Grrrrr..... (Score:4, Informative)
It's actually cheap to live here. I'm in Tulsa, and a $12/hr job can get you a decent apartment, car, etc. Of course this whole thing is going to collapse with the outsourcing to India...
And yes, many Tulsans take things way too seriously. It's because we have nothing else to do!
Or if you prefer to be rational about this... (Score:3, Informative)
House of Representatives [house.gov]
Senate [senate.gov]
Re:That took real guts... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I just called his chambers... (Score:3, Informative)
The truth is that we do not want judges to be easily swayed by public opinion. Public opinion supported slavery and segregation, too. The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights are designed to limit the power of unrestrained public opinion, and the judiciary is our last line of defense in that regard.
Yes, I disagree with the result of the ruling, but I'm glad the judge had the courage to make what he had to know would be an unpopular decision. That's really not something we ought to discourage.
Better yet (Score:2, Informative)
The Honorable Lee R. West
Senior United States District Judge
Western District of Oklahoma
U.S. Courthouse
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140
Chambers Facsimile: 405-609-5151
clickity here [uscourts.gov] and slashdot his website too... don't forget to download his
Re:Just record those three tones that indicate... (Score:2, Informative)
Private Citizen has a free download of SIT tones available on the Private Citizen website:
http://www.privatecitizen.com/sit-tone.wav
No clue about cell numbers and unlisted numbers... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm concerned about people who provided cell numbers and unlisted numbers to the list.
Telemarketers have been able to download the list for some time now from donotcall.org. That means they not only have verified that your number is current but that they also have the potential to add to their call lists additional numbers they did not have before.
The nice lady at the court office said attorney's from neither side had ever mentioned that issue and that the judge had not considered it. I asked whether it was not incumbent upon a responsible judge to educate himself as to all the ramifications of any ruling he might make, whether those issues were raised by the parties or not. I reminded her that up to 50 million people are unofficial and apparently unrepresented parties to the suit and I would think the judge should have given a little thought to protecting my privacy rights as he made his ruling.
Congressman Tauzin's aide who is specifically taking calls re this ruling said 1) this issue isn't over - they are looking at legislation and/or challenges to the ruling and that they are moving quickly and 2) as far as she knows, no one at the legislative level has thought about the issue of unlisted numbers which might now be on that list in the hands of telemarketers. Oops. By the way, I started and ended that conversation by expressing appreciation to the Congressman for his efforts on our behalf.
Charlie, who answered the consumer complaint phone for the FTC Southeast region, was a little confused at first as to what my concern was. As soon as he "got it," he asked to be excused for a moment. When he came back a good while later, he reported that as far as they could tell, the download was still available on the website and they were escalating the question up the chain to the national level as quickly as possible so that someone could address it pronto. Good on Charlie! Very sharp young man -- he deserves a promotion!!
Don't you just love the level of foresight on the part of those working to "protect" our privacy? I mean, I truly do appreciate the effort, but they need to do their homework a little better.
Here's the reference (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.iiipublishing.com/afd/Coperson.htm
Why the DMA is against the DNC list (Score:2, Informative)
The DMA is afrain of losing the people who are too timid to say no the telemarketers. Grandma just can't say no to the pushy TM on the phone, but she can call up the FTC (or is the FCC?) and get her off the list. It's the people, the people who don't want stuff but CAN'T SAY NO when asked to buy it that the DMA is terrified of losing.
Joel.
Re:Grrrrr..... (Score:3, Informative)
Sadly, in a democracy, "right" or "wrong" is irrelevant. It's what the majority wants that counts.
Now, strictly speaking, the US isn't a democracy. Ancient Athens was a democracy, and the voters decided everything of importance directly, much the way Californians vote at nearly every election to decide things their legislature probably could have handled for them.
The US is a democratic republic where the voters are represented by legislators who vote on their behalf. Those legislators are only beholden to honor the wishes of their constituents as long as they care about getting re-elected.
Unfortunately, in the US, those legislators are usually more concerned with getting re-elected than they are with doing what's right or even what their constituents want. So we get government-by-special-interest, where legislators push the agendas of their biggest contributors.
So, back to the original point: In any popular vote, whether the majority is right or wrong is irrelevant. They get what they want. Only people of conscience voting against what they think is wrong--regardless of the consequences--can hope to derail a wrong-headed majority.
Also, in the US, there's this little thing called the Constitution. It's very difficult to change the Constitution and the Constitution can be damnably inconvenient when the majority wants a law passed that discriminates against a specific minority. But, as we've seen in the past, even the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution can be swayed by conventional wisdom of the day. Dredd Scott [state.gov], anyone?
Re:A plan that worked once... (Score:2, Informative)