Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Do not call' list blocked by court
CNN Money ^ | September 24, 2003 | Reuters

Posted on 09/24/2003 8:51:49 AM PDT by rattrap

Edited on 04/29/2004 2:03:09 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - 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, the Direct Marketing Association said on Wednesday.

The U.S. District Court in Oklahoma City said the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority when it set up the popular anti-telemarketing measure, according to the DMA.


(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: donotcall; donotcalllist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 last
To: Tribune7
I got a tele-zapper and it kills most of these calls but those unfortunate to get through get the "Ava" treatment. Ava is my mentally-handicapped sister-in-law and she loves to talk to anyone on the phone. One guy actually took 30 minutes before he gave up.

Before anyone thinks I am being mean to Ava, remember that Ava oves talking to anyone (especially on the phone) so it entertains her.
121 posted on 09/24/2003 2:20:51 PM PDT by packrat35 (reality is for people who can't face science fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: rattrap
It is easier and faster to deal with this by just having a home answering machine set up with caller ID. Most sales calls are out of area with a n 800 # attached so just don't answer it or you can have a recorded message of barf sounds that you can play to the caller. They rarely leave a message on your machine.
122 posted on 09/24/2003 2:21:21 PM PDT by jetson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: packrat35
The Ava treatment. That's great. LOL.
123 posted on 09/24/2003 4:06:57 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: ibheath
What a silly statement! How exactly do they solicit without contacting the prospect? Email, no.. that is spam... Hhhhmmmm, direct mail? lets see....17-30 cents... No, that would break the bank..... door to door...no, can't contact enough people fast enough....

Tough. It would also be cheaper for them to hire gang-bangers to throw notes on bricks through people's windows in exchange for a few rocks of crack, but that doesn't mean they should be permitted to do so.

124 posted on 09/25/2003 5:57:27 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: usadave
Yes, 50 million verified names and phone numbers of people who don't want to be called by telemarketers. So why would telemarketers even waste their time calling people who don't want to be called by telemarketers?

Again, because the dirty little secret of telemarketing is that its profit margin depends on finding the weak-willed, the human-contact-starved, and the not-quite-all-there-any-more.

People who already want something will find the vendor on their own initiative. People who don't want something and have no difficulty in saying "no" will not be swayed by telemarketing. That leaves the people described in the previous paragraph as the telepests' bread and butter.

If such people can shield themselves permanently by taking one simple action, the whole scam dries up and blows away.

125 posted on 09/25/2003 6:02:11 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: ibheath
Don't give the federal govt more power.

What is the source of your assertion that the federal government, rather than the individual phone owner, is placing people on the DNC list?

126 posted on 09/25/2003 6:03:51 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: ibheath
I don't have a problem with this ruling. I am not a telemarketer, but I am perfectly capable of hanging up on telemarketers, or letting the answering machine get it. Just as I am capable of deleting and blocking spam messeges. This is not tresspassing.

THANK YOU. I hate telemarketers as much as the next guy, and I confess that I did register for this list. But the do not call registry is very clearly an intrusive concept as far as protecting free speech. I am grateful that the courts are willing to look at the bigger issue here.

The do not call list imposes a governmental barrier to entry against companies who wish to compete against larger companies with strong market shares. It prohibits a company with a better product or lower price from communicating with 50 million potential consumers using a public medium. It can only result in market inneficiency and higher prices.

It seems to me that if a person lists his name and phone number in a public directory, there should be no prohibition against anyone, whether business or political or charitable, using that information to exercise their free speech rights.

127 posted on 09/25/2003 6:19:37 AM PDT by massadvj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
If anyone has the right to invade my house electronically, how long before he claims the right to do it in person?

I claim the right to do it in person. It's called knocking on your door. You may answer or not, which is your right.

When you put a doorbell in public view, that's the equivalent of placing your name in a public directory as far as I'm concerned.

128 posted on 09/25/2003 6:26:23 AM PDT by massadvj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
The govt will use its power to prosecute those who do not honor the list. THAT is an abuse of federal power.

Sheesh! some of the people on this thread remind me of the ACLU lawyers suing to be free FROM religion, and the rights of others to have freedom OF religion MUST be curtailed.

Before I get flamed, let me point out that I don't think Religious freedom and telemarketing are equal. I am merely pointing out that the mindset that "I have a right to not be uncomfortable" is getting pervasive in this country.

129 posted on 09/25/2003 7:23:55 AM PDT by ibheath (Born-again and grateful to God for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: massadvj
It prohibits a company with a better product or lower price from communicating with 50 million potential consumers using a public medium.

My phone is not a "public medium". My phone is private property.

130 posted on 09/25/2003 7:36:36 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: massadvj
I claim the right to do it in person. It's called knocking on your door.

If you knock on the door of a house posted "NO SOLICITORS" to make a sales pitch, you might be arrested, and properly so.

If you call a phone number posted on the Do Not Call list to make a sales pitch, you might be fined, and properly so.

End of argument.

131 posted on 09/25/2003 7:38:14 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: ibheath
The govt will use its power to prosecute those who do not honor the list.

Yes, just as the government will use its power to prosecute those who ignore NO TRESPASSING signs.

Protection of private property is one of the proper functions of government.

132 posted on 09/25/2003 7:39:11 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
If you knock on the door of a house posted "NO SOLICITORS" to make a sales pitch, you might be arrested, and properly so.

Agreed. But where in the Constitution does it state that the government in the business of making NO SOLICITOR signs? I completely agree I have a right to post a no solicitor sign on my door if I like, and to enforce it. But what business is it of the government's whether I do or not?

133 posted on 09/25/2003 9:49:30 AM PDT by massadvj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

California has its share of weirdoes because most originated in Oklahoma during the 1930s when some Okies had to leave because of the depression and the drought. But I am wondering where some of these new Oklahoma judges have come from. The people in Oklahoma voted to ban cock-fighting and one judge overturned the vote. How's that for stupid?


134 posted on 06/26/2004 5:21:57 PM PDT by madmup43
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Martin Tell

When a telemarketer calls I try to use up as much of their time as possible, then when I have thought of just about every question possible to ask the telemarketer, I tell them what VP CHeney told Senator Pat Leahy recently -
"F*** off and take my name and number off your list. On one occasion I told the caller that I needed their billing address because they had called my private line and I was forced to send them a bill for $250.00 for their call. After going through the original caller and two supervisors they said they would take me off the list. There are plenty of games you can play with them and have some fun at their expense.


135 posted on 06/26/2004 5:29:33 PM PDT by madmup43
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rattrap

Damn!

I just filed a complaint with the feds yesterday on a mortgage firm in Phoenix yesterday hoping that they would fine the hell out of them!


136 posted on 06/26/2004 5:46:11 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
Forget offering opinions. Give them a call each and every time someone calls you trying to sell newspaper subscriptions, or timeshare vacations, or whatever it is you are not interested in. "Hey, I just got a great lead on this super deal, and I thought you just had to hear about it, too!"

Seriously, if enough people feel really strongly about the issue, then the law will be crafted and no court will overturn it.

137 posted on 06/26/2004 5:54:24 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: madmup43
After the do not call list (finally) went into effect I received a few telemarketing calls. I reported them all to the FTC. Those calls ceased. I still receive charity calls; nothing you can do about those.
138 posted on 06/26/2004 7:49:22 PM PDT by Martin Tell (I will not be terrified or Kerrified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior

Thanks to Cheney, we can use the "F" word now, and before I hang up from unsolicited calls, I will say the magic word. Of course, the caller is probably in India or some such place, but, what the heck-- irritate me by calling at suppertime and I will irritate you (if you understand what I mean when I tell you to go "f---" yourself.


139 posted on 06/26/2004 8:31:20 PM PDT by mathurine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rattrap
This decision by a federal trial court will be promptly reversed by the Court of Appeals. Only one Court of Appeals has spoken on this issue and they decided in favor of the law. This is a different Circuit, so the other decision is advisory not binding. Still, the Appeals judges will not want to look like fools. (Trial judges are less squeamish about appearing foolish.)

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "I Did It ... Because I Could"

If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.

140 posted on 06/26/2004 8:42:38 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob (www.ArmorforCongress.com Visit. Join. Help. Please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson