Do Not Call List

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Received an email that said I might want to add my cell phone number
to the National Do Not Call list at www.donotcall.gov. Before I make
any calls or list my phone number on a website, I need some guidance
from this newsgroup.

Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
this Do Not Call list legitimate? Thanks so much for any guidance.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:43:47 GMT, "------>That Way!"
<traxless@msn.com> wrote:

>Received an email that said I might want to add my cell phone number
>to the National Do Not Call list at www.donotcall.gov. Before I make
>any calls or list my phone number on a website, I need some guidance
>from this newsgroup.
>
>Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
>this Do Not Call list legitimate? Thanks so much for any guidance.

I signed up with that website last year when I still had a land line
and had no problem with telemarketers afterwards. The list is legit
AFAIK.
--------
And so it was that later
as the miller told his tale
that her face, at first just ghostly,
turned a whiter shade of pale
--------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:43:47 GMT, "------>That Way!"
<traxless@msn.com> wrote:

>Received an email that said I might want to add my cell phone number
>to the National Do Not Call list at www.donotcall.gov. Before I make
>any calls or list my phone number on a website, I need some guidance
>from this newsgroup.
>
>Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
>this Do Not Call list legitimate? Thanks so much for any guidance.

It's legit. a .GOV site is a government owned site.
--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <cb1vo0tv6ssnfgobpvkmtb3oc2a4u0j5si@4ax.com>,
"------>That Way!" <traxless@msn.com> wrote:

> Received an email that said I might want to add my cell phone number
> to the National Do Not Call list at www.donotcall.gov. Before I make
> any calls or list my phone number on a website, I need some guidance
> from this newsgroup.
>
> Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
> this Do Not Call list legitimate? Thanks so much for any guidance.

I think that lest is designed for landline phones.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <ge2vo011987rb4p5co6ac5nt2512rjbb4g@4ax.com>,
RickRamey <rickramey@nospambellsouth.net> wrote:

> I signed up with that website last year when I still had a land line
> and had no problem with telemarketers afterwards. The list is legit
> AFAIK.

However nonprofit groups, and anyone who has a "business relationship"
with you is exempt. i.e. bring your car in for a recall, and the dealer
is allowed to call you thereafter.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <cb1vo0tv6ssnfgobpvkmtb3oc2a4u0j5si@4ax.com>,
traxless@msn.com says...
> Received an email that said I might want to add my cell phone number
> to the National Do Not Call list at www.donotcall.gov. Before I make
> any calls or list my phone number on a website, I need some guidance
> from this newsgroup.
>
> Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
> this Do Not Call list legitimate? Thanks so much for any guidance.
>
>
Yes, that is the official National Do Not Call site--you can get to it
from the FTC site http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. Legally
solicitors aren't supposed to call cell phones anyway since you're
paying for the call but I added mine anyway. It's made a significant
difference on the home line. I am curious though as to WHO sent you the
email. AFAIK the ftc isn't soliciting listings!
--
Jud
Dallas TX USA

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jud Hardcastle" <l5i5changethistodash5rbo@xemaps.removethis.com> wrote in
message news:MPG.1bf957842b5f6c42989804@news.dallas.sbcglobal.net...
> In article <cb1vo0tv6ssnfgobpvkmtb3oc2a4u0j5si@4ax.com>,
> traxless@msn.com says...
> > Received an email that said I might want to add my cell phone number
> > to the National Do Not Call list at www.donotcall.gov. Before I make
> > any calls or list my phone number on a website, I need some guidance
> > from this newsgroup.
> >
> > Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
> > this Do Not Call list legitimate? Thanks so much for any guidance.
> >
> >
> Yes, that is the official National Do Not Call site--you can get to it
> from the FTC site http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. Legally
> solicitors aren't supposed to call cell phones anyway since you're
> paying for the call but I added mine anyway. It's made a significant
> difference on the home line. I am curious though as to WHO sent you the
> email. AFAIK the ftc isn't soliciting listings!
> --
> Jud
> Dallas TX USA

Keep in mind that with number portability, there are no set blocks of
cellular numbers anymore. Anybody who has ported a landline to cellular
would show up in a telemarketing list.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:15:15 GMT, Jud Hardcastle
<l5i5changethistodash5rbo@xemaps.removethis.com> wrote:

> It's made a significant difference on the home line. I am curious though as to WHO sent you the
>email. AFAIK the ftc isn't soliciting listings!

An email about this was passed around Zale Corporation and one of
their staff forwarded it to me.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <346dnWXMuJd1gg3cRVn-jg@adelphia.com> on Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:40:34 -0700,
"Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote:

>"Jud Hardcastle" <l5i5changethistodash5rbo@xemaps.removethis.com> wrote in
>message news:MPG.1bf957842b5f6c42989804@news.dallas.sbcglobal.net...

>> Yes, that is the official National Do Not Call site--you can get to it
>> from the FTC site http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. Legally
>> solicitors aren't supposed to call cell phones anyway since you're
>> paying for the call but I added mine anyway. It's made a significant
>> difference on the home line. I am curious though as to WHO sent you the
>> email. AFAIK the ftc isn't soliciting listings!
>> --
>> Jud
>> Dallas TX USA
>
>Keep in mind that with number portability, there are no set blocks of
>cellular numbers anymore. Anybody who has ported a landline to cellular
>would show up in a telemarketing list.

<http://www.callcompliance.com/media/2004/01-30-04.html>

January 30, 2004

By: Scott Hovanyetz
Senior Reporter

Portability Solutions Becoming Clearer

Compliance providers are getting closer to establishing a system that
will help telemarketers avoid calls to cell phones in the era of
wireless number portability, according to papers filed recently with
the Federal Communications Commission.

Wireless number portability, which lets consumers keep the same phone
number when they switch from landlines to wireless or switch cell
phone providers, has been around for two months.

Telemarketers still have no way to keep track of consumers who switch
landline numbers to cell phones. The FCC bans all telemarketing calls
to cell phones when using automated dialing equipment, including
predictive dialers. Telemarketers previously were able to remove
blocks of telephone numbers set aside for wireless phones from their
calling lists.

However, likely solutions to the problem are growing clearer. Call
Compliance Inc., which provides a no-call compliance system for
telemarketers, said last week it expects such a service to be
available in 60 to 90 days.

Additionally, a letter filed in December by the Direct Marketing
Association and Neustar, a private telecommunications network
administrator, indicated that the two have settled an often
cantankerous relationship and that the DMA is helping Neustar produce
a solution of its own. Neustar maintains the database that tracks
telephone numbers that have been switched.

[MORE]

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:43:47 GMT, "------>That Way!"
<traxless@msn.com> said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>Will solicitors be able to call my cell at my expense? And if so, is
>this Do Not Call list legitimate?

Click on the Privacy and Security button and see who runs the site.
(Yes, it's as "legitimate" as big government can be.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Jack Zwick wrote:
> In article <ge2vo011987rb4p5co6ac5nt2512rjbb4g@4ax.com>,
> RickRamey <rickramey@nospambellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I signed up with that website last year when I still had a land line
>>and had no problem with telemarketers afterwards. The list is legit
>>AFAIK.
>
>
> However nonprofit groups, and anyone who has a "business relationship"
> with you is exempt. i.e. bring your car in for a recall, and the dealer
> is allowed to call you thereafter.

With regards, to the "Business Relationship", There is a "reasonable"
limit to this. I think this is either 6 months or 90 days I can't
remember for sure and it may even be longer than that. Otherwise
companies you did business with back in 1975 could call you in 2005.
When they drafted the bill, they made sure this loophole wasn't one that
companies could exploit. The main reason for this exception was so
companies could legally contact you, not solicit you.

Having been on the No Call list for from day one, I can say that I've
never seen a company use this tactic with me. However, I still get all
the Not-For-Profit guys wanting donations and stuff.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <41926C82.3060900@usenetjunk.com>,
"R.M" <usenetjunk@usenetjunk.com> wrote:

> Jack Zwick wrote:
> > In article <ge2vo011987rb4p5co6ac5nt2512rjbb4g@4ax.com>,
> > RickRamey <rickramey@nospambellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I signed up with that website last year when I still had a land line
> >>and had no problem with telemarketers afterwards. The list is legit
> >>AFAIK.
> >
> >
> > However nonprofit groups, and anyone who has a "business relationship"
> > with you is exempt. i.e. bring your car in for a recall, and the dealer
> > is allowed to call you thereafter.
>
> With regards, to the "Business Relationship", There is a "reasonable"
> limit to this. I think this is either 6 months or 90 days I can't
> remember for sure and it may even be longer than that.

It's 18 months.

http://www.amquix.info/quixtar_do-not-call.html



> Otherwise
> companies you did business with back in 1975 could call you in 2005.
> When they drafted the bill, they made sure this loophole wasn't one that
> companies could exploit. The main reason for this exception was so
> companies could legally contact you, not solicit you.
>
> Having been on the No Call list for from day one, I can say that I've
> never seen a company use this tactic with me. However, I still get all
> the Not-For-Profit guys wanting donations and stuff.