| Comment Number: | OL-101425 |
| Received: | 11/27/2004 6:26:11 PM |
| Organization: | None |
| Commenter: | Brandon Willis |
| State: | AR |
| Subject: | Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 310 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
To whom it may concern: This is a loophole. As defined by Merriam-Webster a loophole is "a means of escape; especially: an ambiguity or omission in the text throught which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded". I would like you (the FTC) to act in public interest as it is your job to do and stop this loophole, this means of escape, for the DMA. Please, remember the popular support the Do Not Call List received. There is a reason the Do Not Call List received so much public support. Not to put too fine a point on it... but let me spell it out "We the public are sick and tired of the DMA and it agencies interrupting our lunches/dinners and filling our answering machines with their unwanted marketing." If you have any doubt of this look at the vast popularity of the Do Not Call List. Please carefully note that the above statement makes no reference to whether or not a person or a machine is doing the phoning. The very act of phoning is the problem in itself. That bears repeating... The act of phoning _in_itself_ is_ the_problem. I am at a loss to say it any clearer. Remember this is a loophole. Loopholes are defined by an evasion of obligation. The public has spoken to what it thought appropriate for the DMA with the Do Not Call List's popularity. Given that empirical evdence, there is no question to how you (the FTC) should rule. This loophole is diametrically opposed to both your (the FTC) responsibility to the public and to the public will at large. Please, Do not let us down. ---Brandon