Judge kills "National Do Not Call List"

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

If the telemarketing industry goes under, I'm sure the caller ID market will take a big hit, too...

[Firestarter 0]

The Senate has voted 95-0 to give the FTC authority to go ahead with the Do Not Call list. Earlier today, the House voted 418-12 in favour. The President is expected to sign the bill shortly.

 

Update

Edited September 25, 2003 by Cancer Marney

[cynicalprofit 0]

Is that just a tad abusive? I mean just because we dont like it, we get rid of it using any means neccessary. I mean its not illegal. And its not really hurting anyone. Im not defending telemarketrs, but come on, if congress could do this, why couldnt they just one day decided to get rid of people who do junkmail. Why dont we just make a list of people who WANT to be called, wouldnt that be easier and less invasive.

[Firestarter 0]

if congress could do this, why couldnt they just one day decided to get rid of people who do junkmail

Hmm, a Do Not Mail list? Sounds good to me.

[Guest MikeSC]

This whole "do not call" list thing is bullshit anyway. Thats right...I'm on their side. So you basically kill off the industry and put hundreds of thousands of people out of work because people are too pussy to HANG UP. Its not hard, you put the phone down and the call is over.

 

"Boo Hoo, the phone rung and it took 8 seconds out of my day....lets put a industry out of work."

 

Half of the people that will get on this list are the exact same people that actually DO buy the stuff that telemarketors are selling.

So, allowing people to say "Don't call me" will KILL the industry?

 

It's not like this bill says that the practice of telemarketing is illegal -- but it IS stating that HARASSING people (and when you call people who EXPRESSLY state that they are NOT interested an to NOT call IS harassment) is llegal.

 

If you're NOT on the list, then you're saying you don't care if they call you. Thus, the industry is STILL alive and legal.

 

But we deserve the privilege to state that we do NOT wish to be called.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

Is that just a tad abusive? I mean just because we dont like it, we get rid of it using any means neccessary. I mean its not illegal. And its not really hurting anyone. Im not defending telemarketrs, but come on, if congress could do this, why couldnt they just one day decided to get rid of people who do junkmail. Why dont we just make a list of people who WANT to be called, wouldnt that be easier and less invasive.

You seem to miss ONE little fact:

 

NOTHING is being done to make TELEMARKETING illegal. If the victim is not on the list, they are free to call all they wish.

-=Mike

[Firestarter 0]

Developments coming fast and furious on this one. Another idiot judge has blocked the FTC on the grounds of "free speech." This decision is in a different case, filed by the American Teleservices Association.

 

Update

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Full papers at this link. The crutch of the arguement seems to stem around the whole "commercial entities can't call you but politicians still can" thing.

 

So does this go into appeals now or something?

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I've got my very own do not call set up. Its called "I ignore the phone, let the answering machine pick it up, and if its someone I want to talk to they'll leave a message"

 

I've also got the "Internet ties up the phone line during the peak telemarketer hours" going for me as well.

[Ripper 0]

Or you can always do this.

 

The EXACT same motion that you used to pick up the phone...do it in reverse.

 

And Mike, seriously, who ISN'T going to get on this list. The people that actually do use the services being offered will even get on it just to say "I don't like telemarketors, I should get on the list too." This WILL kill the industry and it WILL lead to mass layoffs of employees. And I don't think that is a reasonable price to pay for costing people the few seconds to hang up or LOOK AT THE FUCKING CALLER ID.

[Vyce 0]

This problem will be rectified on an administrative law scale.

 

All Congress needs to do is rewrite a portion of the FTC's enabling act to give them the authority to make the list stick.

 

I think the judicial branch here is taking the balance of powers a little to fucking seriously.

[Lando Griffin 0]

The problem is that charities and the government can still call and annoy you, thus effectively saying some type of speech is "better" than others.

 

I don't care, though. I just do what Ripper does.

[Guest MikeSC]

Or you can always do this.

 

The EXACT same motion that you used to pick up the phone...do it in reverse.

 

And Mike, seriously, who ISN'T going to get on this list. The people that actually do use the services being offered will even get on it just to say "I don't like telemarketors, I should get on the list too." This WILL kill the industry and it WILL lead to mass layoffs of employees. And I don't think that is a reasonable price to pay for costing people the few seconds to hang up or LOOK AT THE FUCKING CALLER ID.

So, this industry dies if people are given the option of not being harassed?

 

Well, boo-frickin'-hoo.

 

I don't think an industry that survives only if people can't demand that they are not harassed is really worth saving.

 

Let 'em be unemployed.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

This problem will be rectified on an administrative law scale.

 

All Congress needs to do is rewrite a portion of the FTC's enabling act to give them the authority to make the list stick.

 

I think the judicial branch here is taking the balance of powers a little to fucking seriously.

The judicial branch hasn't even ATTEMPTED to maintain a balance of power since Warren's heyday.

-=Mike

[Ripper 0]

Oh come on, its not like they are calling at 3 am and shit. They are calling, you say NO and hang up immediately instead of trying to argue with them, and you are done. They aren't harassing people, they are annoying people and it is a difference.

 

I equate this to the same as people that bitch about a show having too much violence. You HAVE the option to turn the fucking channel. You can JUST HANG UP. But people are seeing it as a better alternative to basically kill the industry in a already dwindling economy. It is a selfish mindset, and totally unnecessary.

[Guest MikeSC]

Oh come on, its not like they are calling at 3 am and shit. They are calling, you say NO and hang up immediately instead of trying to argue with them, and you are done. They aren't harassing people, they are annoying people and it is a difference.

 

I equate this to the same as people that bitch about a show having too much violence. You HAVE the option to turn the fucking channel. You can JUST HANG UP. But people are seeing it as a better alternative to basically kill the industry in a already dwindling economy. It is a selfish mindset, and totally unnecessary.

If somebody name is on the list RIGHT now and they're STILL calling, they CLEARLY are harassing as the person has made it ABUNDANTLY clear that they don't wish to be called.

 

Again, the industry is still all legal, regardless. If an industry cannot survive the victims being given the option of not being involved, then the death of said industry is hardly something to mourn.

-=Mike

[Ripper 0]

Oh come on, its not like they are calling at 3 am and shit.  They are calling, you say NO and hang up immediately instead of trying to argue with them, and you are done.  They aren't harassing people, they are annoying people and it is a difference.

 

I equate this to the same as people that bitch about a show having too much violence.  You HAVE the option to turn the fucking channel.  You can JUST HANG UP.  But people are seeing it as a better alternative to basically kill the industry in a already dwindling economy.  It is a selfish mindset, and totally unnecessary.

If somebody name is on the list RIGHT now and they're STILL calling, they CLEARLY are harassing as the person has made it ABUNDANTLY clear that they don't wish to be called.

 

Again, the industry is still all legal, regardless. If an industry cannot survive the victims being given the option of not being involved, then the death of said industry is hardly something to mourn.

-=Mike

If you think that thousands upon thousand MORE people nation wide being unemployed joining the rest of the unemployed that can't find a job is a GOOD thing to protect people that are too pussy to just hang up the phone and want to bitch about basically nothing, then you have a fucked up belief system. If someone is too stupid to realize that if they put the phone back down the call is over, they aren't worth someone losing their job.

[Firestarter 0]

Fifty million Americans disagree. Next case.

[Ripper 0]

Fifty million Americans disagree. Next case.

So...we are suggesting that 50 million + americans don't have a fucked up belief system?

 

Shit, including me, 90% of this board has some real issues.

[Firestarter 0]

So...we are suggesting that 50 million + americans don't have a fucked up belief system?

Yep. These people aren't pre-selected. An internet wrestling message board pre-selects any sample you take from it. The only thing that pre-selects this 50 million is the fact that they have telephones.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

If you think that thousands upon thousand MORE people nation wide being unemployed joining the rest of the unemployed that can't find a job is a GOOD thing to protect people that are too pussy to just hang up the phone and want to bitch about basically nothing, then you have a fucked up belief system.

Plenty of tech support centers and other calling-related jobs have moved to India and other countries. Nothing is stopping telemarketers either really. But if we had fair wage systems set up for countries we do business with none of this would be happening and people could work at call centers where customers call them and not the other way around.

 

This is like when San Francisco voted over outlawing panhandling. The homeless, although they don't have much posessions of their own, shouldn't be allowed to just become the newest part of MY business and harass MY customers for their money. Similarly, do I want someone calling my home office line to harass me with their offers.

 

Sure, all you have to do is walk past the homeless bums, but their peeing on the sidewalk isn't pretty and hell, it's my property they're camped out in front of. It doesn't make sense that I don't have the right to have them removed and blacklisted from visiting my establishment. WHICH IS, by the way, something that telemarketers do have individually. All this does is instead of blacklisting one homeless at a time, I can simply stick a "NO PANHANDLING" sign in my window and walk away.

 

Do Not Call lists are perfectly legal, as they've been legally required for years. What's so unconstitutional about a blanket one?

 

Think about it man. TheMikeSC, Marney, and JotW, three posters who barb one another as being misguided/wrong/stupid/etc, are banding together in unison to tell you what you're saying is dumb.

[Ripper 0]

If you think that thousands upon thousand MORE people nation wide being unemployed joining the rest of the unemployed that can't find a job is a GOOD thing to protect people that are too pussy to just hang up the phone and want to bitch about basically nothing, then you have a fucked up belief system.

Plenty of tech support centers and other calling-related jobs have moved to India and other countries. Nothing is stopping telemarketers either really. But if we had fair wage systems set up for countries we do business with none of this would be happening and people could work at call centers where customers call them and not the other way around.

 

This is like when San Francisco voted over outlawing panhandling. The homeless, although they don't have much posessions of their own, shouldn't be allowed to just become the newest part of MY business and harass MY customers for their money. Similarly, do I want someone calling my home office line to harass me with their offers.

 

Sure, all you have to do is walk past the homeless bums, but their peeing on the sidewalk isn't pretty and hell, it's my property they're camped out in front of. It doesn't make sense that I don't have the right to have them removed and blacklisted from visiting my establishment. WHICH IS, by the way, something that telemarketers do have individually. All this does is instead of blacklisting one homeless at a time, I can simply stick a "NO PANHANDLING" sign in my window and walk away.

 

Do Not Call lists are perfectly legal, as they've been legally required for years. What's so unconstitutional about a blanket one?

 

Think about it man. TheMikeSC, Marney, and JotW, three posters who barb one another as being misguided/wrong/stupid/etc, are banding together in unison to tell you what you're saying is dumb.

When telemarketers start pissing on your carpent then you have a point.

 

I get annoyed with them just as much as the next guy, but I see the bigger picture here and more people out of work is NOT what the country needs. Especially when the greatest harm this industry is causing is making people have to use their arm mucles to pick up the phone and put it back down. I see thousands of people out of work being a greater concern than costing people 2-3 minutes MAYBE a day. 2-3 seconds if people would...here it goes again...HANG UP. There are viable simple solutions that do not include crippling the industry that makes it money. The money saved on advertising cost that pay these people would now be lost, thus the jobs are lost. And all this because people were slightly annoyed.

 

Maybe we should stop car makers from selling anymore cars because traffic is annoying. Yeah, all the auto workers would be out of work and and dealerships, but you wouldn't have to be anymore annoyed than you are now(before you point out it isn't the same thing, the comparison is to the fact that the solution has a greater negative effect than the problem)

[sfaJack 0]

Maybe we should stop car makers from selling anymore cars because traffic is annoying. Yeah, all the auto workers would be out of work and and dealerships, but you wouldn't have to be anymore annoyed than you are now(before you point out it isn't the same thing, the comparison is to the fact that the solution has a greater negative effect than the problem)

The difference is that everyone makes a conscious decision to drive in "annyoing" traffic.

 

Hardly anyone invites a telemarketing call.

 

There is more than one solution to traffic congestion, too (i.e. commuter rail, one moving closer to where they work). How else do you propose to curb telemarketing calls (besides your broken-record "Just hang up!!!"). If I don't want to be harassed, I shouldn't be. They have no right to bug me in my own home. Fuck them and their minimum wage jobs.

[cynicalprofit 0]

im so glad im not going to own a phone in the future...

[Ripper 0]

Maybe we should stop car makers from selling anymore cars because traffic is annoying.  Yeah, all the auto workers would be out of work and and dealerships, but you wouldn't have to be anymore annoyed than you are now(before you point out it isn't the same thing, the comparison is to the fact that the solution has a greater negative effect than the problem)

The difference is that everyone makes a conscious decision to drive in "annyoing" traffic.

 

Hardly anyone invites a telemarketing call.

 

There is more than one solution to traffic congestion, too (i.e. commuter rail, one moving closer to where they work). How else do you propose to curb telemarketing calls (besides your broken-record "Just hang up!!!"). If I don't want to be harassed, I shouldn't be. They have no right to bug me in my own home. Fuck them and their minimum wage jobs.

Goddamn you and your "invalidating my comparison with a good point" ass...

 

 

My overall point is that I don't look forward to the massive job loss that you people seem to be fine with when the alternative is you having to hang up the phone.

[Styles 0]

People have the right not to be harassed in their home. If someone works a long day and wishes to take a nap it's his right not to be woken by a telemarketer.

[Guest MikeSC]

Oh come on, its not like they are calling at 3 am and shit.  They are calling, you say NO and hang up immediately instead of trying to argue with them, and you are done.  They aren't harassing people, they are annoying people and it is a difference.

 

I equate this to the same as people that bitch about a show having too much violence.  You HAVE the option to turn the fucking channel.  You can JUST HANG UP.  But people are seeing it as a better alternative to basically kill the industry in a already dwindling economy.  It is a selfish mindset, and totally unnecessary.

If somebody name is on the list RIGHT now and they're STILL calling, they CLEARLY are harassing as the person has made it ABUNDANTLY clear that they don't wish to be called.

 

Again, the industry is still all legal, regardless. If an industry cannot survive the victims being given the option of not being involved, then the death of said industry is hardly something to mourn.

-=Mike

If you think that thousands upon thousand MORE people nation wide being unemployed joining the rest of the unemployed that can't find a job is a GOOD thing to protect people that are too pussy to just hang up the phone and want to bitch about basically nothing, then you have a fucked up belief system. If someone is too stupid to realize that if they put the phone back down the call is over, they aren't worth someone losing their job.

Ah, heck, in THAT case, let's go ahead and legalize cocaine, so those cocaine dealers won't have to go to prison and rob their families of THEIR incomes.

 

If I say I do NOT want you to call, then I DESERVE the option of SUING THE EVERLOVING CRAP out of you.

 

Perhaps if they WEREN'T obnoxious, some people might NOT opt to be on the list.

 

I find it hilarious, though, that the ability to NOT be harassed will kill an industry.

 

If so, good riddance.

-=Mike

[JHawk 0]

To all the people defending the telemarketers on this one:

 

It's illegal to call anybody once they tell you not to call, as that can be interpreted as stalking and/or harassment.

 

So what legal right do telemarketers have to call me when I already said "DON'T FUCKING CALL ME!"