TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Court Rules Against Do-Not Call Registry
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Court Rules Against Do-Not Call Registry

post #1 of 26
9/24/03 at 9:14am
Thread Starter 
Court Rules Against Do-Not Call Registry

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - A federal judge has ruled that the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority in creating a national do-not-call list against telemarketers.

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by telemarketers who challenged the list, comprised of names of people who do not want to receive business solicitation calls. The immediate impact of Tuesday's ruling was not clear.

The list was to go into effect Oct. 1.

U.S. District Judge Lee R. West sided in favor of the plaintiffs, U.S. Security, Chartered Benefit Services Inc., Global Contact Services Inc., InfoCision Management Corp. and Direct Marketing Association Inc.

The telemarketing industry estimates that the do-not-call list could cut its business in half, costing it up to $50 billion in sales each year.

More than a dozen state with do-not-call lists plan to add their lists to the national registry this summer, the FTC said.

Telemarketers would have to check the list every three months to see who doesn't want to be called. Those who call listed people could be fined up to $11,000 for each violation.

Does this say what I think it does???????????????????????????
Reply
post #2 of 26
9/24/03 at 9:27am
I just wonder who is buying from telemarketers? Who would buy anything over the phone? I tell them before they get a chance to say anything - I do not accept sale or curtesy calls, please take my name off your list. Thank you. They usually say something like - it will take 90 days, but we will take your name off our list.
Reply
post #3 of 26
9/24/03 at 9:40am
I hope that this doesn't affect those states that already have the no-call list in place. I don't think it will, because I know it was challenged here in Colorado and was upheld.

I think it's high time that the American people get what THEY want, which is not to be bothered by pushy solicitors all day and night.
Reply
post #4 of 26
9/24/03 at 10:02am
Oh, no!
Reply
post #5 of 26
9/24/03 at 1:28pm
Nora, I wonder the same thing. Who are these people who are buying what telemarketers are pushing?

The thing is though, if no one was buying from them, they wouldn't have a business. They wouldn't be making enough money to employ all the telemarketers who make the calls.

It does sound like they're going to be allowed to call and harass us again. I'm hoping that since Pennsylvania had their own registry before the national one, we'll still have that.

Don't get me wrong - I don't want to see thousands of telemarketers out of work, our economy definitely doesn't need that. But I also don't want to be harassed in my own home. If I want to order a subscription/new phone carrier/get a new credit card/etc, don't call me, I'll call you.
Reply
post #6 of 26
9/24/03 at 1:37pm
My thinking is that the people who signed up to be on the list are the people who weren't buying from them anyway, so I don't see how they would be losing very many customers...

I could see people signing up their elderly parents, since they sometimes are bilked into buying things they don't want, and are often the victims of non-legitimate scams. And I would think that any reputable telemarketing firm would understand that (although that's maybe naive of me...). If I owned a business I wouldn't want to be making money by selling older people stuff they don't need and can't afford...
Reply
post #7 of 26
9/24/03 at 2:00pm
I sign up for the do not call list .
I had enough off them calling me all the time . One was very late one time and I said to him it is 10pm I cant believe you called me now and hang up . It is so bad with them and cant stand them at all . They also don't take a no for a answer what so ever . Now when some one call I just tell them : not interested and hang up .
I hope tthe do not call list will win that law sude
Reply
post #8 of 26
9/24/03 at 2:25pm
I'm going to make myself unpopular here. I worked as a telemarketer for a short time after my first daughter was born. It was absolutely the worst job I've ever had, and that includes a stint as a cleaner for a residential cleaning service.(Ewwww. Could tell you some nightmare stories from that job.) I was eventually a victim of "budget cuts" because I refused to harass people. They give you this sheet of paper with the most popular excuses people give for not wanting whatever it is you're selling and you are supposed to keep going until the person caves or hangs up. I couldn't do it, I would go through the initial pitch and if they weren't interested I said thank you for your time and hung up.

You'd be surprised at the amount of people that will buy things over the phone. In my case it was a carpet cleaning service and I made an appointment every 20 calls or so. Not a really high ratio, but wasn't failing utterly either.

I do think the registry is a good idea, I'm on it myself. I just see them getting through loopholes of one kind or another for a really long time. At this point they can continue to call you if you have ever done any kind of business with them, which is a huge loophole IMO.
Reply
post #9 of 26
9/24/03 at 3:14pm
Lotsofkids you are not unpopular at all . At one time or a other I am sure we did all some kind of a crapy job in our life . I try to sell something going from house to house and was in the same situation like you and could not do it . The only difference was I look in to the people eyes . So that kind of sell is sure not my calling , I have a to soft heart to do that . I knew a telemarketer myself a while back and he like his job . He was broberly one of does anoing once . So from there I know that they have to do everything they can do to sell . But , I still don't like to be called all the time and every day , from morning to evening arrrrrg .
Reply
post #10 of 26
9/24/03 at 3:22pm
I worked as a telemarketer many years ago also. But it seems as if the people calling are getting ruder and pushier. I have had two in the last couple of months (and I don't answer many of the calls, so 2 is a large percent of the total that I answered) get really, really snotty with me - and I was not being even impolite. I just made it clear that I was not going to buy what they were selling.
Reply
post #11 of 26
9/24/03 at 3:47pm
Now that you mention it they do seem alot ruder. Honestly it seems that most service industries have more rude people these days. Everything from telemarketers to servers to real estate agents. Maybe we're just getting ruder period. Sad thought.
Reply
post #12 of 26
9/24/03 at 4:49pm
Quote:
Originally posted by valanhb
I hope that this doesn't affect those states that already have the no-call list in place. I don't think it will, because I know it was challenged here in Colorado and was upheld.

I think it's high time that the American people get what THEY want, which is not to be bothered by pushy solicitors all day and night.
From what was stated on Tom Brokaw, it sounded like the whole thing was off for now.

In the past couple of months, I have noticed the new ploys to get around the no-call list. I have twice received calls that state, "We are calling because you or someone in your family signed an online form....." Bull. It's just me, and I didn't sign up for jack.

All I have to say is that I recently got Caller ID. I look at each number, and if it is "out of area" with no number given, it's a telemarketer. They hang up the second the machine answers. I screen 100% of the time now. Best move I ever made.
Reply
post #13 of 26
9/24/03 at 4:59pm
According to Colorado's Attorney General, the state laws are not affected by this ruling. http://9news.com/storyfull.aspx?storyid=19058
Reply
post #14 of 26
9/24/03 at 5:00pm
a lot of time when they ask for me or my husband all what I say is : May I take a message please , some just hand up and some say thats ok we call at a later time .
Reply
post #15 of 26
9/24/03 at 5:20pm
According to the latest story on cnn.com http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/24/tech...ex.htm?cnn=yes Congress is working on bills that definitively gives the FTC power to create the Do Not Call list, which is basically what was upheld by the judge.

Of course the telemarketers are saying that this list is in violation of their First Amendment rights....if that's the case then I think that I have the First Amendment right to tell them to F*&* Off any time they call....over and over and over again. KIDDING!!
Reply
post #16 of 26
9/24/03 at 6:04pm
....if that's the case then I think that I have the First Amendment right to tell them to F*&* Off any time they call....over and over and over again. KIDDING!! That is a good one valanhb , Ilike that attitude on you
Reply
post #17 of 26
9/24/03 at 6:04pm
LOL
I will not repeat here, what I have told a few that have called at 8am.
They just had something on the news showing this poor, telemarketer a single mom, and what would she do if she lost this wonderful job.

Well she could find another, that did not intrude on peoples lives.

This is one of my pet peeves(lol)
Reply
post #18 of 26
9/24/03 at 7:16pm
I give telemarketers one try...I say I'm not interested, and if they keep on going, I hang up on them. Also, I screen my phone calls. My friends have learned to just start talking to my answering machine.
Reply
post #19 of 26
9/24/03 at 9:46pm
I believe a decision in one federal court district only impacts states in that district. (Remember the Pledge of Allegiance controversy? That only affected the 9th Circuit.) Often a case will get to the Supreme Court primarily to resolve different decisions made by different federal circuits (once they've gone thru the full appeal process at the circuit level.)

NYS enacted a Do Not Call list back in August 2003. I signed up for it, and so far it seems to have worked. I've only gotten calls from not-for-profit organizations, who were excluded from the list, altho you can tell them not to call you if they do.
Reply
post #20 of 26
9/25/03 at 5:43pm
Well, Congress broke its own record by drafting and passing a bill on the same day that gives the FCC the authority to have a no-call registry!
Reply
post #21 of 26
9/25/03 at 5:45pm
Thread Starter 
YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply
post #22 of 26
9/25/03 at 5:55pm
Bush is supposed to sign it tomorrow, but now another Federal Judge (in Denver of all places! ) is trying to block it, saying it is infringing on Freedom of Speech. http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...all/index.html The opinion basically says that because certain parties are exempt from the rule, namely charitable organizations, surveys and political parties, that commercial marketing is being discriminated against.

Fine, I have an easy solution. Make it an option of the consumer if they would like to get calls from the currently exempted organizations. (not that they are asking me, but it sounds like a plan to me!)
Reply
post #23 of 26
9/26/03 at 5:57am
Thread Starter 
Do-not-call registry faces tougher challenge
Second judge blocks list; cites free speech
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A federal judge issued another, potentially more formidable legal hurdle to the national do-not-call registry Thursday just as Congress granted the Federal Trade Commission authority to create the list.

The Senate and the House of Representatives worked swiftly Thursday to overwhelmingly approve the measure after another federal judge ruled Tuesday that the FTC needed a legislative mandate to create the wildly popular list.

The legislation is now headed to President Bush, who is expected to sign it, his spokesman said.

But U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham issued an opinion blocking the list based on telemarketers' free speech rights, which could be more difficult for advocates of the list to sidestep.

"... The court finds that the FTC's do-not-call registry does not materially advance its interest in protecting privacy or curbing abusive telemarketing practices. The registry creates a burden on one type of speech based solely on its content, without a logical, coherent privacy-based or prevention-of-abuse-based reason supporting the disparate treatment of different categories of speech," Nottingham wrote.

The issue of free speech rights cannot be addressed with congressional action and must be resolved by the courts.

The congressional vote and the most recent court ruling came two days after U.S. District Judge Lee West ruled the FTC needed a legislative mandate to create the wildly popular list.

"Fifty million Americans can't be wrong," Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-Louisiana, declared Wednesday, referring to the number of people who have signed up to block the unwanted solicitations.

The House voted 412-8 for the mandate, and the Senate vote was 95-0.

Lawmakers expected before Thursday's court ruling that the quick congressional action would mean the new list will take effect October 1.

Tuesday, a U.S. District Court determined that the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its bounds by creating such a list.

"Admittedly, the elimination of telemarketing fraud and the prohibition against deceptive and abusive telemarketing acts or practices are significant public concern; however, 'an administrative agency's power to regulate in the public interest must always be grounded in a valid grant of authority from Congress.' Absent such a grant of authority in this case, the Court finds the do-not-call provision to be invalid," the court order stated.

In late June, the federal government launched the national "do-not-call" registry aimed at stopping most telemarketing phone calls to people who regard the sales pitches as invasive and want them blocked.

More than 730,000 people registered the first day.

Five plaintiffs, four of which were telemarketing services, filed suit questioning the FTC's authority to create such a registry and impose rules for automated dialing. The fifth plaintiff, organized as a nonprofit trade association, represents about 5,000 U.S. companies.

Charities, surveys and calls on behalf of politicians are exempt from the registry.

How long is this going to go on for???
Reply
post #24 of 26
9/26/03 at 10:25am
This is one woman's website dedicated to stopping
telemarketing calls; it also explains how to be a
"telemarketer cop" - catching violators of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act (this can result in
a civil penalty for the telemarketers, payable to
you!)

www.dianamey.com/Putting_An_End_to_Telemarketers


I've always tried to be polite to telemarketers b/c I know they're just trying to earn a living too, but if I say no, I mean it, and will hang up on them if they keep pushing. But now, since I've been staying at home, they really are beginning to drive me nuts. I don't want to take the phone off the hook b/c I might miss someone that I do want to talk to, but it really ticks me off when I stop in the middle of something to run to the phone & it's a telemarketer. They call at least 7 times every day!
Reply
post #25 of 26
9/28/03 at 7:48pm
That federal judge is seriously mistaken. The First Amendment in no way grants anyone the "right" to invade my home and harrass me with their sales pitch. In my personal opinion (and with absolutely no evidence for this view other than my opinion) I believe this judge must have some hidden agenda or personal investment of some sort in this type of operation. I realize that's a pretty harsh statement, but I find so many judicial decisions to appear so clearly in support political views and in contradiction to the written law that I can't believe any other mechanism is in play.

As for that pitch, does someone screaming at me over the phone while trying to get through a sales script really think I'd want to do business with them? Or that I'd care if they lose their job? For that matter, with all the people on the do not call list who clearly don't want to buy anything anyway, doesn't that indicate the telemarketers will INCREASE their chance of finding a customer that will buy something?

George
Reply
post #26 of 26
9/29/03 at 11:02pm
Quote:
Originally posted by CharmsDad
That federal judge is seriously mistaken. The First Amendment in no way grants anyone the "right" to invade my home and harrass me with their sales pitch.
I think the major thing that influenced his opinion was that certain types of entities, namely charities & political solicitations, were excluded from the ruling, and thus by singling out the telemarketers, it was an invasion of their first amendment rights, because it wasn't universal. I have no idea how sound a legal notion that is, but this will probably go to the Supreme Court before all is said and done.

To me, telemarketers are kind of a form of stalkers, and stalking is illegal. I signed up for the NYS Do Not Call list, and so far it seems to be working. I only get some of those recorded messages (all from the same outfit, one of those non-profit debt re-organziers).
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Court Rules Against Do-Not Call Registry