Free Republic 3rd Qtr 2020 Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $84,340
Woo hoo!! And we're now over $84k!! Less than $3.7k to go!! We can do this. Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: phonecompany

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Judge Strikes Down Secretive Surveillance Law

    03/18/2013 2:28:37 PM PDT · by JerseyanExile · 2 replies
    Wall Street Journal ^ | March 15, 2013 | Jennifer Valentino-DeVries
    A federal judge this week struck down a controversial set of laws allowing the Federal Bureau of Investigation to seek people's records without a court's approval, saying the strict secrecy orders demanded by the laws are not constitutional. Judge Susan Illston, of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, said the laws, which underlie a tool known as a "national security letter," violate the First Amendment and the separation of powers principles. In her order, Judge Illston ordered the government to stop issuing national security letters or enforcing their gag orders, although she said enforcement of her judgment...
  • Cell-ebration - Gene figures out how to stick it to the phone company

    12/31/2007 10:23:57 AM PST · by 3AngelaD · 71 replies · 237+ views
    Washington Post ^ | December 30, 2007 | Gene Weingarten
    ...Like virtually everyone in America under 35, and like virtually no one over 35, I am now using only a cellphone. I have given up my land line. It happened almost by accident. One day, I changed my home phone service from Verizon to Comcast because Comcast had lowered its prices for a Special Introductory Offer. Right from the start, though, there were problems: People whom I phoned were telling me that my voice sounded like it was coming to them across a parking lot from the drive-through speaker at a Popeyes Chicken & Biscuits. ...soon afterward my phone went...
  • Vanity - FR apparently targeted as source of spam

    02/26/2006 1:10:52 PM PST · by tang-soo · 83 replies · 2,089+ views
    Vanity ^ | 2/26/2006 | Myself
    I apologize in advance for the vanity. I've been a member of FR since 1998 and I think this is the first time I've posted a vanity. However, I think it will be considered worthwhile. My internet provider is sbc and my email domain name is I wanted to share an observation with you concerning my email service. Two weeks ago I sent a small email to about 125 people concerning the funeral arrangements for a fallen US soldier Jacob Spann. I had posted an article to FR about his death and explained that he was the son of...
  • Young Cell Users Rack Up Debt, a Message at a Time

    01/09/2005 2:51:02 PM PST · by wagglebee · 55 replies · 1,432+ views
    New York Times ^ | 1/9/05 | LISA W. FODERARO
    Chaz Albert, a freshman at Mercy College in Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., is a passionate "texter," someone who loves to send and receive pithy text messages via cellphone. He does it at home, at school and at work. He often prefers texting over talking on his cellphone. Last month, though, Mr. Albert's habit caught up with him. Only $80 of his $400 cellphone charges were his father's, and most of his own, he said, were for text-messaging. "I was shocked, but I couldn't do anything about it," he said. "I didn't realize that I got charged for reading text messages. My...
  • Worker opposed to gays wins suit

    04/07/2004 8:12:09 PM PDT · by missyme · 73 replies · 445+ views
    Washington Times ^ | April 7th, 2004 | Amy Fagan
    <p>An AT&T Broadband employee who was fired after refusing to abide by company rules that he said violated his religious beliefs about homosexuality has won a federal court case. Judge Marcia S. Krieger of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado awarded Albert Buonanno of Denver $146,269 for lost salary, loss of 401(k) matching contributions and compensation for emotional distress in a Friday ruling released this week. The judge found that although there was no direct religious discrimination against Mr. Buonanno, AT&T Broadband failed to show it could not have accommodated Mr. Buonanno's beliefs "without undue hardship" to the company he had been with for nearly two years. Mr. Buonanno objected to language in a new employee handbook issued in January 2001 that said "each person at AT&T Broadband is charged with the responsibility to fully recognize, respect and value the differences among all of us," including sexual orientation. He was fired after refusing to sign a "certificate of understanding" acknowledging that he agreed to the policy. The Civil Rights Act requires employers to reasonably accommodate the religious beliefs of employees unless the employer can show it will create an undue hardship on the company to do so. Mr. Buonanno felt his Christian beliefs prevented him from valuing or agreeing with homosexuality, which he views as a sin, but he pledged not to discriminate against or harass anyone, said John W. Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, the group that represented Mr. Buonanno. "This issue is about more than an objection to homosexuality," Mr. Whitehead said. "It concerns the freedom of conscience — the right of individuals to object to something they believe is wrong, especially when it contradicts their religious beliefs, whether it is war, abortion, homosexuality or a number of other issues." A spokesman for Comcast, which owns AT&T Broadband, said, the company "is disappointed in the court's ruling," which they said appears to ignore attempts by companies "to foster diversity and nondiscrimination in the workplace." The spokesman, who asked not to be named, said the company is reviewing the case and might appeal the ruling. Mr. Buonanno did not ask the court to reinstate him as a quota specialist, instead seeking monetary compensation. He now works for Mental Health Corporation of Denver as a counselor. The ruling could embolden other Christians or religious people to challenge similar policies, said Mr. Whitehead, who expects court challenges to the "sensitivity training" companies sometimes require, which he said often aims at training workers to accept and value diversity, including homosexuality. "I think Buonanno is just the tip of the iceberg," Mr. Whitehead said. Mr. Buonanno wasn't asking anything that would unduly burden the company — such as granting him every Wednesday off for religious purposes, Mr. Whitehead said. "All he was saying that he couldn't agree that he would value the homosexual lifestyle ... which as a fundamentalist Christian he sees as a sinful lifestyle," said Mr. Whitehead. But AT&T made "no attempt to even reasonably accommodate him," and they couldn't show undue hardship would occur if they did. In the ruling, the judge listed several things the company could have done to avoid the situation, such as communicating better, getting more details about Mr. Buonanno's concerns, clarifying what the company intended by the language in question, accepting his pledge not to discriminate, or even rewriting the language to make it less ambiguous.</p>