|Received:||11/27/2004 8:20:03 PM|
|Subject:||Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 310|
Comments:I strongly oppose any weakening of the Telemarketing Sales Rule. The DMA's request to bypass the Do-Not-Call Registry for 'established business relationships' is a transparent attempt to subvert the intent of the Registry. Like most consumers, the reason I signed up with the Do-Not-Call Registry is because I don't want ANY telemarketing calls, either from strangers or from firms I have done business with in the past. Through the years, the worst telemarketing abuse has been from firms with which we must have business relationships, such as long distance telephone carriers. Allowing them to call me would completely defeat the purpose of the Registry. Opting-out on a case-by-case basis has never worked and is not an acceptable substitute. 'Do not call' should mean NO calls. Another possibility that would be acceptable to me, however, would be to allow more than one type of entry in the Do-Not-Call Registry. Thus, in addition to 'No Calls Permitted' the Registry could provide one or more flavors of 'Some Calls Permitted.' Perhaps some people would choose an option to 'Allow calls from existing vendors,' although I would not. By preserving consumer choice, I believe that this would give us adequate protection. But in general, I regard unsolicited commercial contacts as intrusive, invasive, costly, annoying, and rude. I believe that they should be illegal -- they are another form of trespassing. Moreover, they don't work with me. As a policy, I will not buy any product or service offered through telephone solicitation. Direct marketers will thus save their own money by not calling me. It should always, of course, be possible for a consumer to opt-in explicitly for calls from a particular vendor. If a vendor has a bona fide opt-in on file, calls should be permitted. This is especially true for calls of a non-solicitation nature, such as order confirmations and follow-ups. I believe that such calls are exempted from the regulation anyway. Thank you for your review of this comment.