Judge Rules Against Do-Not-Call Registry

cnn.com ^ | 9/24/02 | cnn

[scab4faa]

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

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by telemarketers who challenged the list of 50.6 million numbers submitted by people who do not want to receive business solicitation calls.

The immediate impact of Tuesday's ruling by U.S. District Judge Lee R. West was not clear. He did not issue an order directing an action by the FTC. The list was to go into effect Oct. 1.

West said the main issue in the case was ``whether the FTC had the authority to promulgate a national do-not-call registry. The court finds it did not.''

In 1994, Congress enacted the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act that directed the FTC to ``prescribe rules prohibiting deceptive ... and other abusive telemarketing acts.''

But the judge said Congress gave the Federal Communications Commission, not the FTC, the authority to operate ``a single national database to compile a list of telephone numbers of residential subscribers who object to receiving telephone solicitations.''

The FTC said the Omnibus Appropriations Act, signed by President Bush in February, authorizes the FTC to ``implement and enforce the do-not-call provisions of the Telemarketing Sales Rule.''

``This decision is clearly incorrect,'' FTC chairman Timothy Muris said Wednesday. ``We will seek every recourse to give American consumers a choice to stop unwanted telemarketing calls.''

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin, R-La., and Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., said they were confident the ruling would be overturned and that they believe Congress gave the FTC authority to operate the registry.

``We will continue to monitor the situation and will take whatever legislative action is necessary to ensure consumers can stop intrusive calls from unwanted telemarketers,'' they said in a joint statement.

Direct Marketing Association, one of the plaintiffs, said it was happy with the ruling, even though it ``acknowledges the wishes of millions of U.S. consumers who have expressed their preferences not to receive telephone-marketing solicitations - as evidenced by the millions of phone numbers registered on the FTC list.''

The DMA, a nonprofit trade organization representing 5,000 U.S. companies, said it will work with its attorneys, the FTC and the FCC during the next few days to evaluate what the ruling will mean for consumers and businesses.

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

The lawsuit was filed by U.S. Security, Chartered Benefit Services Inc., Global Contact Services Inc., InfoCision Management Corp. and Direct Marketing Association Inc.

A similar lawsuit is pending in U.S. District Court in Denver, where the trade group American Teleservices Association and two telemarketing companies sued in January to keep the FTC from starting the do-not-call program.

In the Denver case, the plaintiffs said the list would violate telemarketers' constitutional rights and exceed the FTC's authority. The FTC argued that the list presented no serious constitutional problems and was created under congressional authority in response to concerns about intrusions into consumers' privacy.

Plaintiffs in the Denver case are Mainstream Marketing Services Inc. of Boulder, Colo., and TMG Marketing Inc., a Nebraska company that operates from Denver.

[curmudgeonII]

Another excellent decision by a Federal judge.

[Keith]

I would like to hire those scumbag telemarketing firms to start a non-stop phone call campaign to harrass Judge West. See how he feels then...

[CDHart]

As much as I hate telemarketing calls, I have to agree with this judge.

Carolyn

[birbear]

Grrrrrrrr!

The obvious will of the people has once again been thwarted by one lone judge.

Grrrrrr!

[Professional]

Govt involved in anything is usually bad. Having the govt involved in this area was very bad. Amazing how many conservatives could understand the dangerous ambitions of the govt getting involved in healthcare, but not this issue.

Not that telemarketers are good, but the cure was worse than the problem.

[hadaclueonce]

would you agree if you worked nights like me, and are bothered all day by these bottem feeding scum suckers?
I know where all the trash from Enron went, they are calling on the phone right now.

It is my damn phone, I pay for every red cent for it's use. No one has the right to call me without my concent.

It would be like someone trying to sell you something by putting a big sign in your front yard.

This is the line in the sand..

[Professional]

Sometimes people support bad, dangerous, idiotic laws. This was such. And rightly so, the courts hopefully will never allow the govt to control who gets to call you. That is NOT the responsibility of the govt.

[hadaclueonce]

well good, post your phone number so I can call forward all these calls to you.

[contessa machiaveli]

will i have the right as a citizen entitled to free speech to tell these telemarketers to f--- their mothers?

i have in the past have had a problem with exercising my freedom of speech after 9/11. by phone....and in a completely non threatening manner. where do you draw the line between freedom of speech and harrassment?

[secret garden]

It's time to repost that article by Dave Barry with the telemarketer's phone numbers.

[birbear]

If an industry can't police itself, then it's up to the government to police the industry.

The telemarketing industry is about as bad as a group of thugs on the street. It's time for some tough sanctions against this bogus, shameful, preying drag on the American morale.

And to think, I'm in a good mood today.

[PaulJ]

As much as I hate telemarketing calls, I have to agree with this judge.

Ditto. The FTC has no business telling business' who they can and can't call.

[theDentist]

Pity the telemarketer who calls MY home tonight.

[Ferret Fawcet]

Well said.

[isthisnickcool]

It may be up to the goverment to police this. But not the federal government. This is an issue for state legislatures.

The federal gov't has stuck it's nose in a place it should not have. But what's new about that?

[hadaclueonce]

spoken by a true telemarketer..

[renosathug]

The biggest problem I had with the idea was my name and telephone number ending up in another big government database. I know it's already there, but I am not going to VOLUNTARILY put it in another one.

[Professional]

Quick, we need more govt, not less. Big brother will save us from everything that irritates us! Let big brother be a benefactor while their at it too! They can charge fees, penalties, create more revenue from their other agencies. Tasty!

[Radix]

The FTC has no business telling business' who they can and can't call

Telemarketers are a pain in the ass. I could see this same logic here to be used in proving that downloading files such as MP3's is also none of the Government's business. It would not be tough to convince me, I already think that!