Recording Law :: Modem Spy

Excerpts from FCC-92-443

Excerpts from an FCC Report and Order titled Rules and regulations implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (CC Docket No. 92-90), Commissioner Barrett issuing a statement adopted September 17, 1992.

III.B.10: Alternatives to restrict telephone solicitations to residences

As directed by the TCPA, the Commission has considered a number of alternatives for residential telephone subscribers to avoid receiving unwanted telephone solicitations. These include a national database, network technologies, special directory markings, time of day restrictions, and industry-based or company-specific do-not-call lists. The NPRM requested comment, as well as focused cost/benefit analyses, of these and any other methods proposed for protecting the privacy of residential telephone subscribers.

III.B.22 Commenters opposed to industry-based or company specific do-not-call lists contend that existing industry-based and company-specific lists have not reduced the number of unwanted telephone solicitations, and that Congress has found such efforts ineffective. Further, these commenter argue that these alternatives provide no affirmative method for the consumer to avoid or reject a telemarketer's first call in advance. Moreover, Private Citizen, Inc. (Private Citizen) contends that telemarketers do not always heed an initial do-not-call request, and may call a consumer several times before honoring a consumer's request not to receive further calls or solicitations.

III.B.23 The legislative history suggests that properly implemented company-specific do-not-call lists would satisfy the statutory requirements of the TCPA. In light of that assertion, and upon weighing the costs and benefits... we conclude that the company-specific do-not-call list is the most effective and efficient means to permit telephone subscribers to avoid unwanted telephone solicitations. ... Additionally, businesses could gain useful information about consumer preferences, and can comply with such preferences without overly burdensome costs or administrative procedures. This alternative would best protect residential subscriber confidentiality, because do-not-call lists would not be universally accessible, and could be verified with a telemarketer's own customer information. Company-specific do-not-call lists would impose the costs of protecting consumer privacy squarely on telemarketers rather than telephone companies or consumers who do not wish to be called. ... In sum, the company-specific do-not-call list alternative represents a careful balancing of the privacy interests of residential telephone subscribers against the commercial speech rights of telemarketers and the continued viability of a valuable business service. For these reasons we, conclude that the company-specific do-not-call list is the alternative that best accomplishes the purposes of the TCPA.

III.E.1 The TCPA also permits states to initiate a civil action in a federal district court against a telemarketer who engages in a pattern or practice of violations of the TCPA. ... Finally, consumers may request that the commission take enforcement action regarding violations of Section 227, consistent with the Commission's existing complaint procedures.

See also:
Table of contents.
Excerpts from FCC-95-310
Restrictions on telephone solicitation