|Received:||11/29/2004 1:19:04 PM|
|Subject:||Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 310|
Comments:I am vehemently against the addition of this loophole amendment. I own an unlisted cellular phone, which I own specifically because I don't receive telemarketing calls on it. Allowing this amendment would effectively give telemarketers an inlet into the cellular phone range. Couple this with the fact that telemarketing companies can find copies of the Do Not Call registry list and they have hundreds, if not thousands, of targets. The "established business relationship" will do nothing to styme the flow of telemarketing calls either. Most companies open up their lists to 3rd parties, providing an easy workaround to this clause (this is usually buried under several paragraphs of legalese tat people don't understand). When using a cellular phone, I pay my provider when I make AND receive calls. In essence, the loophole you are provided makes it so that I am paying to receive telemarketing calls. I canceled my land line phone service because 90% of the calls I received were from telemarketers. Many who left recorded messages in excess of 5 minutes on my answering machine. I will not tolerate my cellular phone service, which I pay much more for than a land line, to degrade into the sewer of advertising that land line phone services have become. The mere fact that you are entertaining this loophole means that you care nothing for consumers and are being paid by the advertising companies.