[opendtv] Re: John Oliver fights robocalls... by robocalling Ajit Pai and the FCC
- From: "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 01:33:04 +0000
Monty Solomon posted:
John Oliver fights robocalls... by robocalling Ajit Pai and the FCC
Pai has helped robocallers by failing to issue strict rules, Oliver argues.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/john-oliver-fights-robocalls-by-robocalling-ajit-pai-and-the-fcc/
"Oliver pointed out that Pai opposed Obama-era FCC anti-robocall rules and 'was
extremely happy when they were overturned.' Oliver was referring to a March
2018 court ruling in which federal judges said a 2015 FCC order improperly
treated every American who owns a smartphone as a potential robocaller."
It is incumbent upon the FCC to word rulings correctly, which it had done in
2015. Furthermore, to explain to non-technically-savvy lawyers what the issues
are, INSTEAD OF exploiting the ignorance of said non-technical lawyers, to
further the FCC's own crooked agenda.
Best to go back and read what this is all about:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/03/ajit-pai-celebrates-after-court-strikes-down-obama-era-robocall-rule/
"Under the US law, an autodialer is a device with the 'capacity' to perform the
function of 'storing or producing telephone numbers "using a random or
sequential number generator"' and the capacity of 'dialing those numbers,' the
judges noted."
And the FCC made it clear that software which does dial "random or sequential
numbers" is not permitted. Just as, we each have the "capacity" to pull out a
knife and stab someone. But if we do so, we have to suffer the consequences. No
one is a criminal just because he has the capacity to be one.
"Imagine, for instance, that a person wishes to send an invitation for a social
gathering to a person she recently met for the first time. If she lacks prior
express consent to send the invitation, and if she obtains the acquaintance's
cell phone number from a mutual friend, she ostensibly commits a violation of
federal law by calling or sending a text message from her smartphone to extend
the invitation. And if she sends a group message inviting 10 people to the
gathering, again without securing prior express consent from any of the
recipients, she not only would have infringed the TCPA 10 distinct times but
would also face a minimum damages recovery against her of $5,000."
The premise is false. So, FCC, why is it difficult to explain that a person
dialing 10 numbers, or for that matter even 100, even without their "prior
consent," as long as she is not dialing RANDOM OR SEQUENTIAL numbers, is not
committing a crime? Could it be that the words "random" and "sequential" are
too technically obscure for some folk? They have a very specific meaning.
It is the FCC's job to understand these concepts, not to pretend they are
dumber than dirt. Or maybe they are?
Jessica Rosenworcel said it right:
"The FCC needs to step up the fight against robocalls, Democratic FCC
Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said.
"One thing is clear in the wake of today's court decision: robocalls will
continue to increase unless the FCC does something about it," Rosenworcel said
Friday. "That means that the same agency that had the audacity to take away
your net neutrality rights is now on the hook for protecting you from the
invasion of annoying robocalls. It's past time for the American public to get a
serious response from the FCC-and a reprieve from the unrelenting nuisance
these calls have become for so many of us."
Sure enough, put a crook in charge, and nuisance robocalls have been on the
rise.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: