Log in

No account? Create an account
Previous Entry Share Next Entry

Telemarketers unite!

As I was trying to go to sleep last night, my husband came in and asked me if I'd heard about the new no-call list/act that the feds had arranged. We'd just had one of the rare annoying calls from someone trying to sell us something over the phone and he was feeling a bit, well, testy. Since I hadn't, he explained what he'd heard (I didn't get the source, but it was probably CNN or the Seattle PI knowing him). He told me that the feds were putting together an opt-in list of people who didn't want to be called by telemarketers for distribution. Seems that if those on the list got a call from someone and didn't meet the exemptions in the act, they could have the telmarketers prosecuted.

I immediately jumped on the exemptions part. Knowing how corporations work, I'm sure they've already got lawyers trying to figure out how to get around them and thus be able to call everyone on the list. So really, this is just another list of phone numbers to be on, but it's free! I can't see a way that this is a good thing, and I'm fairly certain that it would increase the number of annoying calls we get (particularly since I told the phone company they couldn't sell my phone number when I signed up for service).

Please, somebody, tell me I'm wrong and that this legislation will actually have the teeth it needs to do what it promises.

  • 1
They have to pay to get the list. And there are exceptions to it: charities, politicians, people you've done business with within the last X months. The thing that bothers me is that there are already companies who don't follow the law (blocking their number on *69, using machine recordings, hanging up when I ask the company or their name or to get on their no call list, etc) that I can't see why suddenly they would start.

So wait, they have to pay to get the list of people that've signed up with the government to not be called? But they can be prosecuted if they don't follow the list?

Yes! I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the inherent problem here. *grin*

I think the site for it is donotcall.gov.

  • 1