| Comment Number: | OL-100697 |
| Received: | 11/27/2004 12:52:31 PM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | Volek |
| State: | WI |
| Subject: | Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 310 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
I am OPPOSED to any expansion of safe-harbors for telemarketers. Do-Not-Call means DO-NOT-CALL. Unless I specifically give a business explicit permission to contact me, I do not want any contacts under the guise of an established business relationship. That could mean, for instance, that I bought candy for a fund-rasier and had to give my phone number for delivery. Recorded messages serve to further insulate the caller from the consumer and reduce my ability to secure additional information with which to make a complaint. As an example, consider the charade you go through when the fine print is read for an on-air advertisement. I anticipate that any disclaimer to meet the letter of the law will be similarly uninteligible in the recorded message. As for modifying the percent of abandoment, I OPPOSE modifying the rule as it currently exists. Three days is generous and 30 days is excessive and an abuse of the intent of the rule. Should the FTC desire to engage in some constructive modification of the rule that serves the CONSUMERS BEST INTERESTS, I suggest that the Do-Not-Call list be expanded to include political and charitable calls, as well as cell phone calls and text-messaging. It would be refreshing for the FTC to proactively adopt rules that support consumers rather than special interests. Condering local and federal taxes, fees to support phones for the poor, etc., the license I purchase in the form of telephone service should not subject me to unwanted telemarketing calls. This is further exacerbated when I receive calls on my personal cell phone. In this case, I am paying cell charges per minute or per call to receive the unwanted calls or text messages. This is very clearly theft of my service, from which I expect to be protected before the fact by the FTC, not through some after the fact compromise with telemarketers, political or charitable organizations. What I expect of the FTC in protecting my interests is nothingless than a reasonable expectation for a taxpayer! Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these rule changes.