Do-Not-Call List Could Be Opened For Phone Spam 339
Wick_7654 submits a link to this story at the Chicago Sun-Times, which begins "The agency overseeing the national Do Not Call Registry is considering opening a loophole to allow companies to deliver 'pre-recorded message telemarketing.' The effort is being organized by Allen Hile of the FTC's division of marketing practice. Be sure to let the FTC know how you feel about it." The proposed change specifies that recorded calls would be allowed only when an "established business relationship" exists, but provisions like that tend to be stretched to absurdity.
Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:2)
Re:Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:2, Funny)
(Please look at my screenname before moderating this)
Re:Pre-existing Business Relationship (Score:3, Insightful)
What a great way to make sure your ad is indeed, listened to.
If you hang up, you keep getting them because you didn't opt-out.
This is pretty ingenius on the part of the marketers, because to assert your opt-out rights, you have to listen
Buisiness Relationship (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey...it worked with CAN-SPAM, right?
</sarcasm>
Re:Buisiness Relationship (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way to solve this, and the spam problem is to have full accountability. Don't allow a telephone/computer onto the internet unless its idenity is known and there's no technical way to fake it. If the device's identity is hidden or nebulous, it's not allowed to connect. Have devices be physically tracable. Privacy advocates may shudder, but if something like this was in place we wouldn't have problems.
How is this different? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How is this different? (Score:2)
Re:How is this different? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How is this different? (Score:5, Informative)
****************
This is the worst of all possible amendments. Automated phone spam is already the most abusive, as it usually grabs the phone line and won't let go until it's done with its spiel. This wastes my time if I happen to answer the line, and wastes the limited space on my answering machine tape if it picks up. Plus in my experience, automated phone spam is the MOST likely to not have a valid way to get off the list. Oh, sure, it may give you an 800 number to call, but that's likely to reach some convoluted voicemail system that never gets you anywhere. And the concept of "prior contact" has already been stretched to mean "and everyone our company ever shares marketing information with". Not only that, but the upshot WILL be that telemarketers uniformly go to an automated model (much cheaper for them, much more annoying for us). PLEASE don't let this go through. KEEP "Do Not Call" a REAL prohibition against junk calls.
***********************
Re:How is this different? (Score:5, Interesting)
However, my gripe about pre-recorded messages is it puts the burden on the consumer to get off the list -- you have to call the company that just called you back, then get a person on the phone and get them to remove you from their list.
It just makes it that much harder for consumers to deal with, and that much easier for the companies bugging them. Banks of computers are a lot cheaper than banks of people, when traversing a list of millions of phone numbers...
Re:How is this different? (Score:3, Insightful)
Hehe (Score:4, Funny)
Like we didn't see this coming... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Like we didn't see this coming... (Score:2)
Sadly, this is probably a waste of time. (Score:4, Interesting)
This admin seems determined to allow large businesses to do whatever. The can spam act is a total joke just like what will happen to the federal do-not-call list
.One of the interesting things about it is that it allows large companies to do as they see fit. MSN (and I believe Yahoo and AOL amongst others) to this day , still sell an address list, bandwidth, and ips to spammers. In particular, MSN works with companies such as SBC and Qwest and will "borrow" home users IP's for temp useage. Of course, the users are not currently using them, so MSN will allow spammers to appear to be the end-user. So many people here think that spam is originating from China, when in reality, it does not. It is simply given the appearence of such. Of course, the government made sure that can spam did not injure that practise.
Now, they are slipping in a backdoor for the no-call list. If you really want to have this work, then you should try to get your state to pass the same law as Colorado has. Colorado started it and it seems to work well.
Re:Sadly, this is probably a waste of time. (Score:2)
Re:Sadly, this is probably a waste of time. (Score:5, Interesting)
Elaborate please... I can understand that they might sell e-mail adresses to spammers, but actually cooperate and provide them with bandwidth and home user IP's (good thing those are mostly RBL'ed) is a while other matter. Do you have any proof for this? Or at least a tin-foil hat webpage?
Say hello to open relays, anonymous (unusable) proxies and what else... Look, I'm not going to argue with you that most mail coming from China isn't chinese, but this hardly explains the connection between MSN and spammers other than the possibility of them selling the addresses. If MSN was keen enough on spamming, don't you think they'd provide the spammers with means easier than dynamic home IPs?
What I've learnt about governments is that most of them don't have the technical understanding to see the fundamental problem, and they have no inclination or time to learn to understand the kind of problems that arise.
Yes, governments have advisors, and they still have to translate techbabble to laymans terms. Those laymans terms get turned into law-speak, and somewhere along the way an idea to punish someone becomes a loophole, either because there is an error in translation or there is political intrest in letting the problem exist.
got ya (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:got ya (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't they realize that those of us that went thgough the trouble of putting our numbers on tht list won't buy anything from them? Why are they wasting their time and ours?
Are you insane? (Score:5, Insightful)
The other was from a company I already do business with (I yelled at them anyway and moved my business to another company that don't anoy me at work). They used the pre-business loophole so I told them what my opinion was with that and talked to everyone I could reach in the company. I also reported them to the consumer ombudsman, since they are abusing their power grid monopoly in Oslo to justify pushing sales calls.
From an outside perspective, it seems like the only ones enjoying freedom in the US are big, bug business. They can trample the freedom of private citizens quite easely, it seems and bother them at will while the government drags its feet. And counts its money, I presume. We have the loophole too, but we are at least working on closing it, not opening it more.
Re:Are you insane? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes.
Help! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Are you insane? (Score:5, Insightful)
No. In fact, ever since I added our phone number to the federal do-not-call list, telemarketing calls have in fact stopped.
The exception is the occasional charity, but even those have pretty much ground to a halt. When they do call, the conversation goes something like this:
"Hi! This is the Save Small Kittens from Cancer fund, will you give us money?"
"We're on the federal do not call list."
"We're a non-profit charity, we are exempt, sir".
"And, given that we are a household that has registered as not wanting telemarking calls, what genius thought calling us would be a good way to get money from us?"
"Uh...well...er...um..."
"Did it occur to anyone that, in fact, by calling a household listed on the do-not-call list, you would in fact generate substantial ill will, and virtually guarantee we'd never send you a dime, even if we might have been planning to do so?"
"Uh..."
"Don't call us again." [click]
It's very simple- any time you get a telemarking call from an NPO and you're on the do not call list, tell them that, by calling you, they've been crossed off the list of charities you donate to. Particularly if you've already donated to them- they can see this on their screen- it will be HIGHLY effective.
Well, that and (I believe) under the new laws, even an NPO can't call you BACK if you tell them to piss off...they have to honor the request, at least for a few years.
Re:Are you insane? (Score:3, Insightful)
so I told them what my opinion was with that and talked to everyone I could reach in the company. I also reported them to the consumer ombudsman...
Most Americans will wine and grump and murmur about problems for hours, but are unwilling to take such simple and direct citizen action as the above in order to preserve their freedom and privacy. Like spoiled children (which they have plenty of!), they expect someone else to do t
Great! (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe then they will realise that these people are in fact helping them not call people who won't buy their crap.
High pressure sales tactics. (Score:3, Informative)
Here are a few examples:
http://seniorhealth.about.com/library/eldercare/b l _apact1.htm [about.com]
and another http://aging.state.ny.us/news/letter/0109scam2.htm [state.ny.us]
Most people will just hang up, but as with email spam, it only takes a few suckers to make the whole system profitable for the scum.
The scum would really love to get a hold of phone listing so they could send out their "you have won a prize in our free give away" calls.
What about people (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, with most call centers in India/Indonesia/Malaysia/etc, it becomes cost effective even with only a 1% or so return. When you're paying someone 35 cents/hr. to do phone calls, you don't need a lot of business.
very little (Score:2)
Re:Great! (Score:2)
--
Screening technology is pretty good... (Score:5, Informative)
If things get really bad, just switch to cellphones. They can't call those, although for some reason they get a lot of wrong numbers.
Re:Screening technology is pretty good... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Screening technology is pretty good... (Score:2)
True, although the logic for that escapes me, since I don't recall any adjectives before "speech" in the 1st Amendment. Of course, the Incumbency Protection, er, "Campaign Finance Reform" act has started shredding the protections for political speech also, so it's sort of consistent in a depressing way.
Getting back on topic, freedom of speech does not include the freedom to harass, which a company is doi
Re:Screening technology is pretty good... (Score:2, Informative)
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822.3.
I'm pretty sure Yoda said that, and either way the tall guy with the pointy ears from Star Trek is Mr. Spock, not Dr. Spock. Dr. Spock wrote a book on how to raise children, and I'm almost positive that he doesn't use any "stardates".
I don't get it (Score:2)
No land line = no problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've found a very simple solution to this problem-I use cable internet and a cell phone. It is illegal to telemarket cell phones, and I've thus far not had it happen. I get a better deal on my cell then I would on landline service anyway (same cost, give or take 2 bucks, and no cost for long distance as a bonus.)
As a side note on the spam issue, I use a "throwaway" email address for public posting. I get little spam to it even, and absolutely none to my gmail account, which is given only to friends, family, etc.
Re:No land line = no problem. (Score:3, Informative)
Yep, that happened to me too since it is usually impossible to get DSL without a land-line (aka "naked DSL").
The solution? No telephones plugged into the landline. They can ring me all they want but I've got now way of ever even hearing it. If I really need to use the landline, in an emergecny or something, I can always plug one phone in for the duratio
You had me at Hello. (Score:5, Funny)
No way (Score:2)
"This is an important message. It is dire that you call us back at the following number: 1-800-555-1234
We must speak with you on an urgent matter
The first time I got one of these, I thought something might have happened to a loved one... I quickly learned that if I answer the phone to a robot, I should hang up immediately.
Re:No way (Score:2)
Opening a loophole? (Score:3, Insightful)
I have a better idea.. why not just leave the rules as they are, and offer an opt-in for people who are willing to recieve such calls? Oh wait, that would be nobody.
Not sure what others have experienced, but the number of telemarketing calls that I have recieved since signing up for the list, has dropped from 5-10 PER DAY to about one a week. The federal do-not-call list is one of the few really useful things that the government has done in as long as I can remember. Yes, I hear that telemarketers are rapidly losing jobs, but for some reason I just can't bring myself to care. It might have something to do with the fact that before the list, I had to shelve my answering machine, unless I wanted to come home to 20 minutes of advertising after a day of work.
I knew they'd find a way to screw it up.
Must, hurt, someone, with, sharp, stick... (Score:2, Interesting)
That's why it's for "prerecorded" spam only! (Score:2)
Good for Chicago Sun-Times? (Score:2)
What a terrible thing for my government to do. For people to comply, they must have access to the list. So, people will now be able to use the list to get numbers of contacts they've had in the past?
I really, really, really, fucking hate these bastards who are using my tax $$$ for this bullshit propaganda. The FTC has a fucking marketing department? It's the fucking government. They don'
NO! FUCK THiS! (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope these calm words will help.
Exactly why I never signed up (Score:5, Interesting)
But then, I don't waste my time with telemarketers either. Here's how the average telemarketing call to my house goes:
Me: Hello?
TM: Hello, can I speak with [horrible attempt to pronounce my name]--"
click!
Nothing personal, but I don't let them get the first sentence out. And I've noticed that I get much fewer calls than before. I suspect a refusal to listen gets noted somewhere in some database and eventually you get fewer calls as a result. Try it. Unless it involves bombing a third-world nation somewhere, you probably shouldn't rely on a government run by George W. Bush to get something like this done right.
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:3, Interesting)
-TM: Hello, can I speak to $name
-Me: Yes, hold on a second please
At this point of the conversation, go play five minutes in another room while the guy is waiting. An alternative game would be to count how much time the TM can wait.
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:2)
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:2)
TM: Hello, can I speak with [horrible attempt to pronounce my name]--"
click!
While that may work for most American sounding names, what if your name is unusual and/or foreign? Your strategy would block legitimate calls as well. And I'm speaking from experience as a French living in the US and used to all sorts of variations of my last name, the funnier ones being morphings into some sort of Russian last name...
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:2)
Re:Exactly why I never signed up (Score:3, Insightful)
They have managed to get it right? Where?
death for all cold callers (Score:2)
The annoying thing is the various country do-not-call arrangements do not cross country boundaries.
The only cold calls I now get are from the USA trying to sell me timeshares in Florida or to tell be I've "won" some price in some game I never entered.
Military recruiters (Score:5, Interesting)
Finally, I asked him to take me off his list and never call again. He replied that SINCE I HAD CONTACTED HIM, he could not remove me. Knowing the conversation never goes anywhere and such people have rarely been considerate of my suggestions to end the conversation, I took the initiative to hang up myself. I expect they'll call again in a few months, and the whole circus parade can begin anew. Since they are always so eager to stay on the line, perhaps I'll buy a karaoke machine for the occasion.
Re:Military recruiters (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Military recruiters (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Military recruiters (Score:2)
Who do politicians work for, again? (Score:2)
1. Do not call registry established.
2. People who don't want to be called put their name on the list.
3. Hence, politicians figure it's okay for those people to be called.
It's like responding to the "unsubscribe" link on spams you get. If you actually say you don't want any more, you'll become inundated. Politicians are working for the spammers, not for you and me.
you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
When you push that button, it would cut you off until you let go and emit a nice clean ear piercing 20Khz tone as powerfully as possible down the line.
That way when a telemarketer calls, speak softly so they listen up then press.
Re:you know... (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact, I got a call a couple of days ago from Florida (I am in Scotland) trying to sell me hollida
while it does suck (Score:2)
Re:while it does suck (Score:2)
When your job is to basically be as annoying as humanly possib
Re:you know... (Score:2)
Re:you know... (Score:2, Funny)
"I'm going to become rich and famous after i invent a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the phone"
(misquoting bash.org [bash.org], if such a thing is possible)
Established business relationship (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not sure how "established business relationship" can be abused, since a former relationship doesn't exist anymore and shouldn't be allowed to justify calling me now. Of course, we'll have to see how the law is worded....
Re:Established business relationship (Score:2)
So you should have to consent to Blockbuster asking for late rentals back? Apart from the sheer lack of necessity of this, Blockbuster will simply include a line stating as such in their receipt, where you do sign and give a copy back.
I don't want to have to opt out of it.
Then don't worry - you can't opt out of it. To use a more extreme example, there isn't any way to "opt out" of creditors or repoers coming after you, is there?
once y
Not that it stops them now. (Score:2)
How are we supposed
My comment to the FTC, from Sydney Australia (Score:2, Informative)
I'm utterly stunned that these changes are even under consideration, and at taxpayer expense!
I live currently in Sydney, Australia. I have a US VoIP phone number on NDNCL, with extra anti-marketing features, and *still* manage to receive unsolicited calls from businesses that I never authorized to make such calls. I sometimes enjoy joking with the callers, "Yes, New South Wales is really a state. I don't know why it doesn't show up on your computer. Didn't you know, Australia is part of America now?"
I bel
Re:My comment to the FTC, from Sydney Australia (Score:2)
else mentioned that this folly, how ever it plays
out, is being paid for by my tax dollars.
well, unless you count the huge contributions that
telemarketers made to the Bush campaign.
ok, here's the problem (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm darned glad... (Score:2)
Marketer Labor vs. Consumer Labor (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd be willing to let them call me... (Score:2)
If they are going to advertise to me over that medium, why aren't _THEY_ the one's paying for it? The system seems to work for television, after all.
Loopholes (Score:2)
phishing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Having been on the do not call list since the begnining I can say that it has worked very well. Where I used to get a couple of calls a day I have recevied only a hand full of calls over the last year. For those that I could get a company name or phone number I have reported them. I received a call yesterday that seems to be the new method of annoying people. The phone number is blocked and it is a recording, this case offering free travel, after giving the pitch with no mention of a company name they want you to leave your name and phone number so they can get back to you. Kind of like tele-spam (registered trademark pending on the term tele-spam). Well hopefully I cost them some time since I tried my best to fill up as much tape/disk as possible telling them just what I thought about them calling someone on the do not call list. Hopefully it consumed a fair amount of time as they had other people listen to the message I left. Slow them down from processing any morons that actually left their information.
My revenge HAHAHA (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, I got thrown in the 'endless hold for angry customers' (Verified on the newsgroups). After five times trying to get ahold of someone who could fix this ever increasing volume of calls, I lost it and started a barrage of calls using 5 lines and an autodialer. I would get to just before where an operator picked up, and put them on hold, then move to the next line. I got amazingly good at it, and picked up the line on some telemarketing stragglers screaming, "WHO IS THIS!?!".
I kept this up for an hour, which I am pretty sure fucked up their profit margin on that day.
Still more calls a few days later - I guess they thought I wasn't serious. Another polite request to talk to the manager, and a dump into endless hold.
Operation Eternal Freedom went into effect again, and this time I feigned an old lady's voice, "I'm trying to reach my son, -insert name here-", on every seventh call. The others went right to hold, until they found no one on the line and hung up. Of course, I was ready with an autodialed response. 45 minutes (while waiting for a backup to complete) later, I called it a day.
Third time, three 45 minute sessions - I got where I could do it one handed on speakerphone, and get some real work done.
No more calls after that.
Did they get my message? I left about 2,463.
Kill two birds... (Score:3, Interesting)
The first time, I tried it. I think they stopped for all of a month.
Once they restarted, I decided to make us unprofitable to FAX. I called their toll-free removal number, and when asked to confirm that I had entered the correct number, I would press "2" for no, starting the whole process over again. Then I automated this with just the a
Is anyone surprised at this? (Score:2)
I just realized..... (Score:3, Insightful)
I bet it does.
Re:White List (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:White List (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Should we "Abandon Phones" too? (Score:2)
I really suspect that phone-spammers will start to use the tricks of email spammers before long.
Re:Should we "Abandon Phones" too? (Score:2)
(yes there is a potential for false positives, but your friends should know better than to use a phone)
Re:Should we "Abandon Phones" too? (Score:2)
I get about 200 per day, but never spend more than 30 seconds addressing the lot since I have a nice spam filter set up, and messages from people I know are flagged.
Re:typical progression (Score:2)
I wonder what ever happened to the concept of integrity and principles in government ?
Your statement implies this existed at one time.
I still get telemarketing calls due to loopholes in the policy. They call from Canada or other off shore call centers. I think the only real solution is to cancel phone service, but of course I cannot do that because the cell phone coverage is spotty at my home. But if you think about this, its not only the telemarketers who will benefit. The phone companies themselves ma
Re:typical progression (Score:2)
Re:typical progression (Score:3, Interesting)
Good call! The FTC will be a profitmaking branch of the government, like the patent and trademark offices. They just have to change the law so that you need to buy a permit to break the (old) law. There's no law you couldn't do that with, right up to and including murder.
Of course it has been done before elsewhere (recall "indulgences", "letters of marque", "royal companies", and lots more variations) and it could have been done here any time. It was never
Re:typical progression (Score:2)
Typically, in order to get money, they will offer to send you something.
Follow the money, find a local connection, put them in jail. Rinse. Repeat.
Re:i hate those things (Score:2)
Re:How to foil telemarket calls (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How to foil telemarket calls (Score:3, Insightful)
The annoying part is the emergency phonecalls that might come from something related to my kids. A school probably doesn't know I keep my ringer off and to call my pager first, and with a 911 extension so I know it's not just some number I don't recognize. Since the DNC list, I've been able to turn the ringer back on, and it's been nice.
My son is getting phone calls now, and I doubt his
Re:How 'bout we just make all telemarketting illeg (Score:5, Interesting)
Congress outlawed junk faxes some years ago, and it worked for a while. However, my fax server was getting about a dozen a day (five days in Cancun for only $300! Free timeshare in Florida!) 'til I moved. Fortunately they haven't found me yet, but given that this activity is already illegal I don't expect telemarketers to be any more respectful of the law
My home network has a server that handles a lot of tasks, including email, faxing and caller ID services. I have the capability to simply hang up on any unrecognized incoming calls (if the call comes in blocked or private all the other side hears is a "click*.) If you're blocking your number I presume you're someone I don't care to hear from. *click*. If the FTC neuters the DoNotCall list in this way, I'll have to configure my system to ignore any calls not on the accepted list. I would allow emergency calls to go through with a touchtone bypass code, but that alone would stop automated telemarketing.
One day I'm sitting at home and the phone rings
Re:How 'bout we just make all telemarketting illeg (Score:2)
Re:How 'bout we just make all telemarketting illeg (Score:2)
Re:How 'bout we just make all telemarketting illeg (Score:2)