Rethinking the Do-Not-Call list

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
I signed up for the list, but now that I think about it I am a little pissed that the government took it upon themselves to decide who I could block from calling my house.



Don't get me wrong. I'm all in favor of the idea of giving people the option of blocking solicitors, but why not give me the option to block charities, political calls, and surveys as well?



Some people argue that there should be no DNC list and that people who don't want calls should go and buy one of those tele-zappers from Radio Shack. Personally, I think the DNC list is effectively the same as buying the tele-zapper, but far more efficient as there is a demonstrated public desire for the service.



BUT, I presume the tele-zapper can be set to block charities and surveys as well and if it can't one can easily envision a technology that would (maybe an answering machine that dissuades solicitors before the phone even rings).



So why not give us the option when signing up for the DNC?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 33
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    The exceptions are to avoid first amendment objections that would be easy to win. I agree with you though, it would seem to me that "speech" that demands our attention diminishes our right to ignore it. Even if it's not commercial I think I should have a right to opt' out of it.
  • Reply 2 of 33
    This is not a "Free Speech" issue. Your "Freedom" doesn't extend to my Paid Phone Service.



    While I'm not sure of a DNC Nationwide list I feel that they should be required to never block their caller ID info. That way we could do the blocking on our own.
  • Reply 3 of 33
    well if the telemarketing industry took it upon themselves to start the list then the US gov wouldn't have got involved. the telemarketing industry obvoisuly don't give a sh*t about people
  • Reply 4 of 33
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    This is not a "Free Speech" issue. Your "Freedom" doesn't extend to my Paid Phone Service.



    I agree.



    I also think we need to start lynching BS judges that are randomly *ucking around with things. First in CAL and now in DC....
  • Reply 5 of 33
    (At first I thought you were talking about the Democratic National Committee...)



    I believe there are existing laws in all states that require individual organizations to keep their own DNC lists, so you should be able to tell any group to put you on their own DNC list. But I'm not sure if that applies to charities and political groups.



    BTW, the only reason the feds can get involved is because it's interstate commerce if an out-of-state group calls you, so in-state groups are unaffected by this national DNC list anyway.
  • Reply 6 of 33
    resres Posts: 711member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    This is not a "Free Speech" issue. Your "Freedom" doesn't extend to my Paid Phone Service.



    While I'm not sure of a DNC Nationwide list I feel that they should be required to never block their caller ID info. That way we could do the blocking on our own.




    It is very much a freedom of speech issue. The do not call list is discrimination and censorship plain and simple. Creating a law that disallows a group of people the right to communicate via phone, based on what they want to communicate, is just wrong.



    As for caller ID, I don't like the idea of making it illegal for some people to block there caller ID info. What I would like to see is some new features added to Caller ID, but I think I'll start a new thread for that.
  • Reply 7 of 33
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by burningwheel

    well if the telemarketing industry took it upon themselves to start the list then the US gov wouldn't have got involved. the telemarketing industry obvoisuly don't give a sh*t about people



    They do have a list. It cost you $5 a year to be on it and only the group that associated with Telecommunications blah blah blah Association of America or some such group respect the list.





    So it's crap.
  • Reply 8 of 33
    So I am not allowed to discriminate and censor who I wish to call me on my phone? I must accept all phone calls? I do not have the right to restrict people from calling me? I am obligated to have a list generated with my name and phone number on it and have it perpetuated around telemarketers (I guess this one would be "freedom of the press").



    I dunno, that would be like me being allowed to stand in a schoolyard cussing a blue streak, and the teachers couldn't tell me to shoo because it would violate my free speech. (Extreme, I know...)
  • Reply 9 of 33
    resres Posts: 711member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JimDreamworx

    So I am not allowed to discriminate and censor who I wish to call me on my phone? I must accept all phone calls?

    -snip-







    Screen your calls all you want (I know I do), no one is going to force you to pick up the phone, or keep you from hanging up on someone you do not wish to talk with. Just don't let the government to pass laws preventing people from even trying to communicate with you.
  • Reply 10 of 33
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Res

    Screen your calls all you want (I know I do), no one is going to force you to pick up the phone, or keep you from hanging up on someone you do not wish to talk with. Just don't let the government to pass laws preventing people from even trying to communicate with you.



    How can you screen your calls when the telemarketer blocks caller ID info? Should I have to guess if it's a friend who's in an analog call area on his cell phone?



    As for your revised caller ID proposal - if I set up a rule to disallow any calls with the telemarketing header, is it not the same as signing up for the DNC list? If there is no requirement for caller ID header info to be passed along with a telemarketing phone call, then your proposal would be useless.
  • Reply 11 of 33
    Hehe. Poor DMA. Outsmarted again.



    FCC to take over FTC role in DNC list enforcement.



    Quote:

    "The public is understandably losing patience with these unwanted phone calls, unwanted intrusions," Bush said. "Given a choice, Americans prefer not to receive random sales pitches at all hours of the day. The American people should be free to restrict these calls."



    Smartest thing he's said in a few months. I would have thrown in a couple of 'evildoers' for good measure.
  • Reply 12 of 33
    resres Posts: 711member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by audiopollution

    How can you screen your calls when the telemarketer blocks caller ID info? Should I have to guess if it's a friend who's in an analog call area on his cell phone?



    I just let the answering machine pick up if there is no caller ID, if it is someone I want to talk to I'll pick up the phone when I hear their voice.



    Quote:

    As for your revised caller ID proposal - if I set up a rule to disallow any calls with the telemarketing header, is it not the same as signing up for the DNC list? If there is no requirement for caller ID header info to be passed along with a telemarketing phone call, then your proposal would be useless. [/B]



    It is quite different. The do not call list is would make it illegal for a group of people to dial your number, and inflect criminal penalties on them if they do call you (even accidentally). With headers I would route all calls with missing or unknown header information to my "junk voicemail" box.
  • Reply 13 of 33
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Res

    With headers I would route all calls with missing or unknown header information to my "junk voicemail" box.



    So, would you make it a requirement that all telemarketers must include header info?
  • Reply 14 of 33
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Res

    It is quite different. The do not call list is would make it illegal for a group of people to dial your number, and inflect criminal penalties on them if they do call you (even accidentally). With headers I would route all calls with missing or unknown header information to my "junk voicemail" box.



    It doesn't impose criminal penalties on the callers, and it doesn't make it illegal for a group of people to dial your number. It only provides a database for people to choose to say "I don't want to be called by you," which, remember, the telemarketers say they want.
  • Reply 15 of 33
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Forcing people to use an answering machine, caller ID, or answer and hang up, costs people and businesses money. The Courts have already ruled that no one has the right to force you to pay money.
  • Reply 16 of 33
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    The courts have a line between corporate speech and individual speech. The latter being much more untouchable than the former.





    Otherwise California could never get away with their draconian restrictions on corporate speech.
  • Reply 17 of 33
    resres Posts: 711member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    It doesn't impose criminal penalties on the callers, and it doesn't make it illegal for a group of people to dial your number. It only provides a database for people to choose to say "I don't want to be called by you," which, remember, the telemarketers say they want.



    Uh, as far as I can tell you are mistaken -- The do not call list is not just a database that telemaketers can use if they want to. The government can fine telemarketers who call numbers on the list up to $120,000.
  • Reply 18 of 33
    resres Posts: 711member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    Forcing people to use an answering machine, caller ID, or answer and hang up, costs people and businesses money. The Courts have already ruled that no one has the right to force you to pay money.



    The reason telemarketers cannot call you on your cellphone is that it cost you money to receive the call. On a ground line it is only the caller that gets charged.



    Answering your phone and hanging up costs you money? How, and is it any more then the cost of going through your mail? Besides no one is forcing you to use caller ID or an answering machine. If you want to use them you can.
  • Reply 19 of 33
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    So Res what do you do for a living? Why are you trying to hard to defend a group most people flat out hate and wish would go away?
  • Reply 20 of 33
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Res

    The reason telemarketers cannot call you on your cellphone is that it cost you money to receive the call. On a ground line it is only the caller that gets charged.



    Answering your phone and hanging up costs you money? How, and is it any more then the cost of going through your mail? Besides no one is forcing you to use caller ID or an answering machine. If you want to use them you can.




    Fair enough, but I pay the monthly fee on my home phone line for my own use.



    My use of an answering machine should be for receiving messages while I am out, not to screen calls. Caller ID is useless when many cell calls and telemarketing calls come through as 'Caller Unknown'.
Sign In or Register to comment.