Do Not Call List Under Attack

smooth wombat writes "Do Not Call. Those words are music to millions of Americans who have signed up for the list so they're not bothered by telemarketers. Not content to let things as they are telemarketers are now lobbying the FCC to have state laws which regulate the practice overturned. In April an ad-hoc group of firms ranging from the Direct Marketing Association to the National Children's Cancer Society filed a joint petition asking the FCC to declare that it has 'exclusive jurisdiction over interstate telemarketing calls.' The issue revolves around some states whose Do Not Call laws are more strict than Federal law and which prohibit telemarketers from calling anyone on a Do Not Call, regardless of an existing business relationship." Update: 07/21 18:42 GMT by Z : Official EPIC page, with contact info and background.

I wonder..

[Kjuib]

What part of DO NOT CALL dont they understand? I do not want people calling me trying to sell me stuff.. so DO NOT CALL me! hard to get much simpler.

Re:This could be VERY bad

[DietCoke]

I doubt it. This doesn't mean that DNC would be abolished, just that it would fall under the less-strict regulations of the federal government. Not that a change like that is a good thing, but it wouldn't put listees at risk in the manner you're suggesting.

He obviously was born before it took effect

[Gamingboy]

"There is no evidence that (a favorable FCC ruling) will lead to large increases in telemarketing calls," he said. He, obviously, does not consider the fact that the large amount of telemarketing calls before the DNC list took effect is evidence that, without a list, that they would once again reach their old levels.

More Feds

[magarity]

Just what the USA needs. More Federal involvment instead of state by state.
/sarcasm.

Clearly for Federal Regulation

[sterno]

This law makes perfect sense being a federal law. Why? Because almost all telemarketing calls are crossing state or possibly national borders. Thus there's a natural complication when you have different laws in different states with different abilities to enforce those laws on others.

Better to have one federal law to simplify things.

And I still wonder, why do those telemarketers want to call me if I'm on this list. Seems like they are being done a service here. I'm not going to buy their crap so no sense wasting time on a call.

Re:I wonder..

[HiddenCamper]

Somehow i was getting calls on my cell phone for a period of time, it all stopped though. seriously, if telemarketers want to call people, then telemarketers should give out "Telemarket phones" that they can call people on. Im pretty sure no one would take them.

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[garcia]

If you really don't want anyone calling you throw out your busted old landline.

Tough shit if the only acceptable broadband Internet option is DSL, right?

While I use my mobile phone for long distance calling and only have the landline as required for DSL service I should still have to suffer with telemarketing calls because they whined to the FCC?

The American public whined far longer to get the DNC lists enacted. Now that we are comfortable we should lose them and have to move to mobile phones and no broadband?

Wrong answer.

Incredible

[Rew190]

The worst thing about an action like this it is CLEARLY against the will of the people. The Do Not Call list is opt-in, it only applies to those who go out of their way to sign up. The only "victims" of something like this are the CORPORATIONS who are being denied the right to directly attack those who don't want to have their houses invaded by direct advertising. The people gain nothing from this sort of action, they only lose out.

How is it possible that a democratic governing body, which is supposed to be looking out for the people, is taking a direct stance against them? Which American citizens are rallying against the DNC list?

Yet more sad evidence that the government is more concerned with corporate interests than those of the people.

Re:I wonder..

[Anonymous Coward]

The same thing with spammers...

They send me emails that are barely legible, so that they can try to get around the spam filters I have set up. Do they really think, that if I've gone to that much trouble to block them, that if they do manage to get through, I will even give the spam a second glance?

These people need to get hit with the clue stick, and hard.

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[eln]

If the only reason you have the landline is so you can get DSL, then just don't hook up a regular telephone to it. The phone can't ring if the phone doesn't exist.

For now, at least.

[Vainglorious Coward]

I moved and did not get a landline phone in my new abode. It's illegal for marketing types to call my cellular phone

If these bottom-feeders manage to get the DNC laws overturned, what makes you think they won't then start whining^Wlobbying about how unfair it is that they can't call cell phones?

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[wayne]

t's illegal for marketing types to call my cellular phone. I win. If you really don't want anyone calling you throw out your busted old landline.

You know that the telemarketing industry is trying very hard to "fix" this "loophole". With out being able to contact people on cellphones, how can they do proper political opinion (and push) polls? How can legitimate companies keep in contact with their customers? This is all very damaging to the US economy. You can't trample on the people's rights to political and economic speech like that, just because you have chosen to only have a cell phone.

While I'm being sarcastic, I'm sure that the DMA and political parties actually believe this stuff.

Re:I wonder..

[jayhawk88]

Oh but see, you have an "existing business relationship" with them, since this one time you bought batteries at Target with your Bank of America Visa credit card, Bank of America sold your student loan and personal information to Wells Fargo, who sold it to Sallie Mae, who sold it's list of customers to Fannie Mae, who shares a database with several mortage companies, some of whom use cold calling to drum up business during the winter months.

How dare you not recognize the legitimate and in no way phony "existing business relationship". How do you expect Bruno's Mortgage and High Interest Loans to not communicate with you, their (possible, potential, maybe if they're drunk when we call, three times removed) customer?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Attention DMA....

[Khyber]

The FCC is NOT a law-making entity.

The FCC has no power to overturn state laws or find them unconstitutional, this is the Supreme Court's job.

The FCC is not the way to go. Lobby Congress.

And watch how they laugh in your face as they think "I don't want these whiny bastards calling me everyday trying to get my money that I just weaseled from the taxpayers."

Re:Why no marketing on cell phones?

[jam244]

The reason, Dr. Disaster, is that incoming phone calls on most landlines in the US are free. Incoming calls on cell phones are, typically, not.

fcc reform

[Anonymous Coward]

Broadcast Flag, ClearChannel, Do Not Call...

Seems to me the FCC is more trouble than it's worth. I don't see how their jobs couldn't be split up between Congress, IETF and Underwriters Labs.. We could scrap spectrum allocation in favor of a law that says you have to comply with the RFC's. Congress could regulate media ownership. UL could make sure your radio doesn't asplode.

Right now it's just a big beaurocratic loophole controlled by partisan hacks. 3 political appointees who easily are corrupted by lobbies. Congress at least has to answer to us. We can have direct say in IETF if we choose to participate and UL's main source of value is their word.

The landscape has changed dramatically since the motivations for creating the FCC. I think it's time to either sit down and do some serious rethinking of what the FCC's role is or scrap it entirely and replace it with something that matches todays reality.

Re:I wonder..

[MysteriousPreacher]

Those emails are painful to read. I was wondering how they are meant to work.

Let's say I'm a tech-novice. To me, those emails look like the work of a semi-literate. Would I really want to buy medicine from them?

As a techie, I can see that they are dliberately trying to bypass spam filters which means that I instantly disregard their email.

Funny email arrived recently claiming to be from Wells Fargo. Of course I don't even have a Wells Fargo account but even if I did, would I really be tricked since they spelt their own company name as 'Wells Forgo'?

Re:I wonder..

[eaolson]

What part of DO NOT CALL dont they understand?

You're the one that has it wrong. They understand perfectly. They don't want to obey your wishes.

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[Cro Magnon]

Until the telecrapers get that pesky law overturned.

Re:I wonder..

[iamplasma]

The best part of the the whole Do Not Call registry- Not only are non-profits exempt.... But so are Political candidates! Those self serving a##holes.

Whoa, politicians may be self serving assholes, but that exception makes 100% perfect sense, for legal reasons. Quite simply, it'd almost undoubtably be a huge violation of the first amendment in the US to pass a law which says "you can't phone people and promote your political views", and I can certainly understand it. Yes, politicians are assholes, but banning political speech is a VERY dangerous path to go down, and after all, politicians are dependent on public opinion, unlike telemarketers, so if you don't like it, just vote against the guy, and send a letter in saying why.

Re:I wonder..

[fatcatman]

I do not want people calling me trying to sell me stuff.. so DO NOT CALL me!

Well, here's the thing, why do they even WANT to call you? If I were a telemarketer, I'd love do not call lists. Those lists would save me an awful lot of money calling people who are virtually guaranteed to not buy anything.

It's like, "Here, these people don't want to be your customers. They won't buy anything from you. If you call them, you will be wasting time and money." And the idiots whine, "Noooo! But I WANT to call them!!! Surely my slick salesmen can talk them into SOMETHING!!"

Man, I'd love a list like that. Talk about targeted marketing. These dorks don't seem to get it...

Re:I wonder..

[pete6677]

On that note, perhaps someone could set up a form of subsidized phone service where people get a discounted/free phone in exchange for listening to a certain number of sales calls. That way, a telemarketer would not just be using your phone as a free marketing tool for themselves. That's what irked me the most about telemarketing; it's a phone that I pay for so that I can use, not to provide advertisers with a free medium. Perhaps some people would not find the advertising offensive, and with Americans' desire for all things free or cheap, it might be a success.

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[Radres]

I pay SBC $15/mo for a land line, and an additional $26/mo for the DSL, for a grand total of $41/mo. Speakeasy is charging $56/mo for even the most basic DSL without a phone. How does it make sense to go with Speakeasy when I can just disconnect the ringer to my phone, and have the added advantage of being able to make clear local calls when my cell phone is acting up?

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[Anonymous Coward]

Even better,

Record a message that sounds like you are talking to them. As follows

Hello? (pause)
Who is this? (pause)
what is this about? (pause)
I'm not sure what you mean (pause)
Who did you say you are with? (pause)
I really don't think I understand (pause)
Let me get this right, you are who? (pause)
Can you hang on a minute? (VERY LONG PAUSE)

Etc.

Re:Stay off my phone!

[Shalda]

The issue revolves around some states whose Do Not Call laws are more strict than Federal law and which prohibit telemarketers from calling anyone on a Do Not Call, regardless of an existing business relationship.

Actually, I think this is a very reasonable question that needs to be addressed. If I have a company (and calling center) operating out of Minnesota and we have customers/former customers scattered around the country, I don't want to have to keep up on the particulars of laws in 49 other states. This is the sort of thing that the Commerce clause of the Constitution is meant for. If I call from Minnesota to Virginia, who's laws am I subject to? MN? VA? Both? This is a legitamate federal question.

On the other hand, if I'm in MN and calling a customer also in MN, then I should be only subject to MN law.

Re:Incredible

[GecKo213]

Yet more sad evidence that the government is more concerned with corporate interests than those of the people.

Corporations file taxes 4 times a year compared to the average person filing just once a year. Corporations keep money moving in the economy and into the governemnt coffers. This isn't a bad thing. Without corporations, or business, you wouldn't have your computer, car, house, shoes, shirts, clothing... and on and on. Small businesses become large businesses and then in turn become corporations in order to benefit from laws, tax advantages, benefits etc. Corporations are what make the world go around. Business owner wants financial gain, create a product or service to sell, advertise it and then reap the profits when we all buy what they're selling. The only corporations that around day to day and longterm are the ones that are providing a product or service to someone who is willing to pay. I don't know about any of you, but I'm not going to learn, to say, manufacture steel products to give away for the good of the world. I want to be rewarded for my hard work. Cash, check, or charge work just great for me.

Re:I wonder..

[Anonymous Coward]

Modded funny, but I think you're right. The proper way to implement the list would have been an opt-in DO CALL list.

Re:I wonder..

[Alex P Keaton in da]

I am not trying to stir the pot- However- it would be considered legally harrassment for a politician to call us at 3 am... so if we can restrict calls at 3am... how big a step is it it restrict unwanted calls at 3 pm, especially if we work 3rd shift.
Free speech is restricted. Call your ex girlfriend 30 times tommorow and see if the poilce show up at your door...

Re:Doesn't bother me anymore

[dakirw]

Or, hook up a fax machine to it. It'll provide a nice friendly greeting. :)

Good for them

[nuggz]

You want to call people of that state, you buy the list, which costs more annually than the entire federal list, for what that's worth.

Cool, not only do they make it difficult to telemarket in their state, they're probably turning a profit on those that do call in their state.
Looks win win for the citizens to me.

Re:Slashdot IS my morning coffee...

[PeelBoy]

Don't you think the whole "insensitive clod!" thing is a bit played out on this site? Seeing it makes me want to puke. Seriously, can we think of some new funny thing to say? "insensitive clod!" has been exploited to it's full potential.

Re:Incredible

[maxpublic]

You've somehow confused capitalism with corporatism. The two are not one and the same.

Max

Re:I wonder..

[pete6677]

Actually I found that being abusive reduced the total number of calls I received (before the do not call list). Being nice to them but declining their offer usually resulted in me being called again the next night with the same offer. Any telemarketer with half a brain (maybe 10% of them) would know that putting an abusive person back on the list will just reduce their number of possible sales while increasing their stress level.

Do you feel pity for Nigerian scammers, too?

[Anonymous Coward]

Following that line of thought; do you feel pity for Nigerian scammers being ridiculed on public web pages, too?

I don't consider telemarketing a legitimate business, even though it is legal. Therefore I applaud making telemarketers feel unwanted, despised and hated. Because they are!

Re:I wonder..

[cpt kangarooski]

However- it would be considered legally harrassment for a politician to call us at 3 am

No, that's probably not harassing.

Call your ex girlfriend 30 times tommorow and see if the poilce show up at your door...

That's probably harassing.

Free speech is restricted.

Not nearly so much as you seem to think, and ideally virtually (or absolutely) not at all. Far better to have an absolute first amendment, I think, than to have a bunch of holes in it.