| 5/25/2017 6:17:01 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
citylights01
Annapolis, MD
38, joined Feb. 2013
|
No thanks.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/republicans-claim-1st-amendment-right-to-send-you-robo-voicemails/
GOP asks FCC to exempt direct-to-voicemail messages from robocall rules.
Jon Brodkin - 5/25/2017, 1:30 PM
Enlarge / The FCC is being asked to decide whether this ringless voicemail technology should be subject to anti-robocall rules.
Stratics Networks
224
You might start getting many more voicemails if Republicans get their wish.
A marketing company called All About the Message recently petitioned the Federal Communications Commission for a ruling that would prevent anti-robocall rules from being applied to "the delivery of a voice message directly to a voicemail box" without ringing the recipient's phone. These ringless voicemails are already happening, but their legal status is unclear.
That petition was filed in March, and last week the Republican National Committee (RNC) asked the Federal Communications Commission to approve the petition. The petition asks the FCC "to declare that the delivery of a voice message directly to a voicemail box does not constitute a call that is subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ('TCPA') and its implementing rules," the RNC wrote. "The RNC supports this clarification, which is consistent with the language of the TCPA."
An FCC finding against the petition "would not only restrict an important form of non-intrusive communication; it would have serious consequences for the First Amendment rights of those engaged in political communication via telephone," the RNC also wrote. The Republican group told the FCC that it uses "all manner of communications" to discuss political and governmental issues and solicit donations, "including direct-to-voicemail messages."
Further Reading
FCC chair wants carriers to block robocalls from spoofed numbers
The US Chamber of Commerce and American Financial Services Association are also pushing the FCC to approve the petition. The Democratic National Committee has not weighed in on the proposal.
The TCPA prohibits non-emergency calls made with auto-dialers, artificial voices, or prerecorded voices without the "prior express consent of the called party." There are exceptions for charities and limited exceptions for political campaign robocalls. Political robocalls are "permissible when made to landline telephones, even without prior express consent," but "prohibited to cell phones, pagers, or other mobile devices without the called party's prior express consent," the FCC says. TCPA rules also apply to text messages.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has worked to eliminate or prevent implementation of consumer protection regulations in areas such as inmate calling rates, data security, TV set-top box rental fees, disclosures of hidden fees and data caps, and net neutrality. But Pai has taken a consistent stand against robocalls, describing the problem as a "scourge" that results in US residents receiving 2.4 billion robocalls a month despite rules intended to restrict such calls.
When asked if Pai has any position on the direct-to-voicemail petition, an FCC spokesperson said the commission cannot comment on pending petitions.
"All petitions are put out for public comment after which we will review the record" and prepare a declaratory ruling, the FCC said. "There is no set timeline for resolving such petitions and we cannot comment on the content of a petition until it is resolved by ruling." Comments are being accepted until June 2.
“They should be illegal, like other spam calls”
Since the issue started receiving more news coverage this week, the FCC docket has received well over 100 comments from individuals opposing the petition.
"I am incredulous that 'ringless' voicemails are being proposed; they should be illegal, just like all other spam calls," one petition opponent wrote. "They aren't ringless. My phone rings to notify me when a voicemail comes in, and I have to take action to silence that notification. But 'ringless' is twice as bad, because, with a normal phone call, I can see who left the message and decide whether to listen or delete. With this proposal, I would have to listen first. Please don't do this!"
A key question is whether a ringless voicemail constitutes a "call" as defined in the TCPA.
All About the Message is a company from Wyoming that describes itself as "a white label distributor of Stratics Networks." It provides "a proprietary direct to voicemail insertion solution known as 'Ringless Voicemail Drop,'" not a "call" in company parlance.
Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!
|
| 5/25/2017 6:17:39 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
citylights01
Annapolis, MD
38, joined Feb. 2013
|
Continued
“The abuse suffered by consumers will be unlimited.”
"Stratics’ voicemail insertion solution bypasses the wireless telephone and telephone subscriber altogether, creating a direct communication between Stratics’ servers and the voicemail system of the carrier telephone company," the petition from All About the Message said. Voicemails are thus not delivered through telephone calls, the petition said.
The Stratics product's website boasts that the technology "Insert[s] Ringless voicemails directly into mobile phones WITHOUT making a call!" and offers 1,000 "test drops" to potential customers who want to try it out. Stratics claims that its technology is legal because the FCC has not regulated voicemail and "we never directly call the recipient."
A lawsuit and a settlement
A Recode article points out that another provider in 2014 asked the FCC to clarify that ringless voicemail doesn't violate anti-robocall rules, "but it never received a ruling."
All About the Message wants a waiver from the TCPA that would be retroactive, shielding it from legal liability for previous behavior. In January, a proposed class-action lawsuit was filed in US District Court in Florida against another company, TT of Pine Ridge, alleging that the company violated the TCPA. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that "a direct to voicemail service platform is not covered by the TCPA," and thus the company "did not 'make a call'" as defined by US law.
The parties have since agreed to settle the case. But the plaintiff's lawyer filed an FCC comment opposing All About the Message's petition.
"In order to continue enforcement of the TCPA it is imperative that ringless voicemails are not given a stamp of approval by the Commission," attorney Chris Miltenberger wrote. "If the Commission approves the Petition the abuse suffered by consumers will be unlimited. There will be nothing to prevent marketers from inundating the voicemail box of every cellular user."
Miltenberger arranged for expert testimony submitted by Randall Snyder, who helped design wireless phone technologies as an AT&T Bell Labs engineer in the early 1990s and is now president of the Wireless Research Services consultancy.
"My conclusion and expert opinion is that the underlying technology platform marketed and sold by AATM (Stratics Networks) initiates automatic calls to cellular subscribers’ voicemail boxes en masse qualifies as an ATDS [Automatic Telephone Dialing System] as defined by the TCPA and associated regulations," Snyder wrote.
Snyder described several technological methods that underpin direct-to-voicemail calls, arguing that they should be covered by the TCPA. For example, direct-to-voicemail calls can be "initiated by dialing both a pilot number (aka a backdoor number) to the respective voicemail system along with the cellular telephone number of a subscriber to identify the voicemail box," he wrote. "The automatic calls Stratics Networks initiates to voicemail boxes certainly requires cellular telephone numbers to be dialed as part of the call process."
All About the Message has been careful to describe its messages "as not being direct calls to cellular telephone numbers," Snyder wrote. But that doesn't provide an exemption to the TCPA, which has no carveout for non-direct calls, he argued.
Voicemail would be littered with advertising
If the petition is allowed, the result will be "intermittent audio advertisements that are required to be played by cellular subscribers while they are accessing their voicemail messages" without consumers' consent and without providing any benefit to consumers, Snyder wrote.
Snyder also argued that extra voicemails could drive up customers' bills. Although voicemail is generally bundled into a plan with data and voice calling, there are cases where consumers pay extra fees and face storage limits. Snyder noted that Verizon's visual voicemail costs $2.99 a month and can hold up to 40 messages.
"Additional fees like this reveal the egregious nature of ringless voicemail technology. Unbeknownst to cellular subscribers, their voicemail boxes, which are indeed a cellular subscriber service, can fill up with prerecorded voice messages from robo-calls," he wrote. "This prevents more important and desired voice messages from being left and potentially costs subscribers additional fees to increase the size/capacity of the voicemail box."
|
| 5/25/2017 6:26:11 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
cinnamonnhaze
Minneapolis, MN
53, joined Apr. 2014
|
Ah geez. It already takes me nearly 30 minutes a day to delete stupid voicemails & I have missed important messages because of this junk. Yesterday I missed my doctors voicemail & she let me know when I called her today. (She wasn't happy.)
I'm on that "do not call list" yet I get a call 2-3 times a week about a student loan that I don't have. I've asked them to stop at least 3 dozen times as this has been going on for over a year!!!
Now what?
|
| 5/25/2017 6:27:23 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
sdgncalix3
Palm Bay, FL
44, joined Dec. 2012
|
I try to block every unknown number that comes up
|
| 5/25/2017 6:33:50 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
61falcon
New Hope, PA
76, joined Feb. 2008
|
Both the state and Federal no call lists a waste of time and effort.
|
| 5/25/2017 6:35:59 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
scarredandtatto
Oral, SD
52, joined Aug. 2013
|
There is no state do not call list. The federal do not call list is very effective, even for cell phones.
|
| 5/25/2017 6:40:38 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
cinnamonnhaze
Minneapolis, MN
53, joined Apr. 2014
|
Scarred -
Please send me that number or post it.
I must not have the correct one.
Thanks!!!
|
| 5/26/2017 6:53:23 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
kraven_morehed
Greenwood, LA
96, joined Jul. 2014
|
I actually had to to buy a call blocker off of amazon for my home phone,because I was getting several robocalls a day,and they were driving me crazy!!
[I was actually about to turn my home phone off because of them!!!!]
I noticed that they were all coming for out of area,though,so I blocked every call from every area code in the country,except for my own,and the one right next to where I live,[with a few numbers of friends and family on the 'allow' list,of course]
now I don't get ANY robocalls!!!
the call blocker was the best $100 I ever spent!!!!
|
| 5/26/2017 8:15:26 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
drwookie
Reading, PA
63, joined May. 2013
|
There is no state do not call list. The federal do not call list is very effective, even for cell phones.
You can register for the federal no call registry online at www.donotcall.gov or by calling toll-free 1-888-382-1222.
You can register for the Pennsylvania Do Not Call List by calling 1-888-777-3406 or visiting
https://www.attorneygeneral.gov/Consumers/Do_Not_Call_List/ to fill out an enrollment form.
|
| 5/26/2017 8:23:52 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
jitssbaby617
Roslindale, MA
38, joined Jun. 2014
online now!
|
I guess city would have had Paul revere put in jail lol
|
| 5/26/2017 8:29:31 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
drwookie
Reading, PA
63, joined May. 2013
|
Ah geez. It already takes me nearly 30 minutes a day to delete stupid voicemails & I have missed important messages because of this junk. Yesterday I missed my doctors voicemail & she let me know when I called her today. (She wasn't happy.)
I'm on that "do not call list" yet I get a call 2-3 times a week about a student loan that I don't have. I've asked them to stop at least 3 dozen times as this has been going on for over a year!!!
Now what?
Criminals don't honor the do not call lists. They spoof phone numbers that are hard to track and change them often. If your phone has a bounce feature, sending unwanted calls directly to another number.
I suggest bouncing the numbers to 800-CALL-FBI (225-5324). The FBI investigates fraud and can more easily catch perps and the illegal phone banks will quickly take your number off their lists When they hear "you have reached the offices of the FBI"
Phone scammers buy and sell lists of numbers and when a few numbers in the batch lead directly to the FBI, the whole list will be tainted and become practically worthless.
|
| 5/26/2017 9:10:18 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
fishnthec
Mesquite, TX
65, joined Oct. 2010
|
This just in!
The Republicans have adopted their own rendition of Hanoi Hanna coming to a broadcast, Email, TV, Radio, Cellphone near you to get their hateful Fake News message out! 
Remember- win at any cost! That is all that is important!
|
| 5/26/2017 9:22:27 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
beanhammer
Denton, TX
52, joined Jun. 2014
|
This just in!
The Republicans have adopted their own rendition of Hanoi Hanna coming to a broadcast, Email, TV, Radio, Cellphone near you to get their hateful Fake News message out!
Remember- win at any cost! That is all that is important!
Your party is the socialist party not mine.
|
| 5/26/2017 9:44:57 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
fishnthec
Mesquite, TX
65, joined Oct. 2010
|
Your party is the socialist party not mine.
That's right! Your party is the new Fascist party!
|
| 5/26/2017 11:42:56 AM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
condor_0000
Tampa, FL
59, joined Feb. 2013
|
I guess city would have had Paul revere put in jail lol
Paul Revere is a great right-wing hero who went ringing those bells and warning the British. Wait a minute! What?
Sorry, everyone! I get all my history from Sarah Palin.
|
| 5/26/2017 12:01:53 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
w6o6l6f_1
Richmond, VA
39, joined May. 2014
|
Robo calls are annoying when used for solicitation.
Don't mind when it is for something like a school closing for a snowday.
|
| 5/26/2017 12:46:22 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
jason_in_tx
Bryan, TX
33, joined Apr. 2013
|
I guess city would have had Paul revere put in jail lol
Why are you such a retard? I bet your momma smoked crack when she was pregnant.
|
| 5/26/2017 12:49:58 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
mrroscoereturns
Ochopee, FL
58, joined Oct. 2015
|
I guess city would have had Paul revere put in jail lol
Paul Revere knew what he was doing.. he knew to take Rte 60 out of Medford Square to get to Arlington 
|
| 5/26/2017 12:52:20 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
citylights01
Annapolis, MD
38, joined Feb. 2013
|
Why are you such a retard? I bet your momma smoked crack when she was pregnant.
There's something seriously wrong with him.
|
| 5/26/2017 12:54:03 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
jitssbaby617
Roslindale, MA
38, joined Jun. 2014
online now!
|
There's something seriously wrong with him.
Answer the question
|
| 5/26/2017 12:55:52 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
citylights01
Annapolis, MD
38, joined Feb. 2013
|
I already answered your question several times. Again, if you feel the need to have a thread about it, make one.
You brag about being violent all the time, so you complaining about anyone being violent can't be taken seriously.
|
| 5/26/2017 12:58:54 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
jitssbaby617
Roslindale, MA
38, joined Jun. 2014
online now!
|
I already answered your question several times. Again, if you feel the need to have a thread about it, make one.
You brag about being violent all the time, so you complaining about anyone being violent can't be taken seriously.
So you can't answer the question and point to fake post that you made.. lol
Interesting
|
| 5/26/2017 1:18:41 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
citylights01
Annapolis, MD
38, joined Feb. 2013
|
Fake post? What are you talking about?
|
| 5/26/2017 7:45:19 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
fellowforyou
New York, NY
67, joined Jan. 2010
|
Might be stepping over the line. Robocalls spreading lies.
|
| 5/26/2017 7:57:43 PM |
Republicans claim 1st Amendment right to send you robo-voicemails |
|
muldoon1959
Vallejo, CA
58, joined Feb. 2008
|
Leave it up to rightwingers to get the constitution wrong.
That's not what the first amendment is about.
|