| Comment Number: | OL-109926 |
| Received: | 12/12/2004 2:00:34 PM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | Whitney M. Bollier |
| State: | CA |
| 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 strongly object to any modification of the TSR to allow telemarketing calls that deliver a prerecorded message to consumers with whom the seller, or on whose behalf the calls are made has an established business relationship for the following reasons: I deal with numerous businesses (utilities, banks, insurance companies etc) that own numerous other businesses that I don't deal with or care about. I do not need or want telephone solicitations, live or recorded, intruding on my time, at my expense, tying up my phone line or filling my answering machine with sales pitches that PREVENT important calls from friends, family, etc from getting through or being made. It is inconceivable how direct marketers can even consider their telephoned solictations, selling widgets or whatever, as having the same rights as a recorded message from your doctor telling you your chest x-ray is suspicious, or there has been an industrial accident in your area, or of a hostage situation at your childs school....the list of hypothecticals is limited only by ones imagination. The right to sell widgets via prerecorded telephone messages should not be considered a Constitutional free speech issue; because a widget is not an abstract idea given freely to change one's thinking regarding public policy. A widget is simply a device or service designed to benefit only its seller, not the public as a whole. Therefore, a widget seller should not be given the right to intrude on the inner sanctum of individuals, disrupting their lives, blocking important phone calls, or filling answering machines with prerecorded sales pitches that prevent wanted messages from being recorded. If a widget seller, or their surrogates, want to sell widgets, there is no law that prevents them from advertising their widgets to the general public through the mails, web, radio or television. The reason that there is no law against these particular forms of advertising, is that the individual rights of the targets are not infringed upon, as the target is not forced to read, see or listen to the advertisements at a time not of their choosing. Telephoned advertisements on the other hand, infringe on individual rights as it forces the target(s) to take action at the convience of the advertiser. BOTTOM LINE: When a telephoned sales pitch is made to a target, individual rights are infringed, as it forces the person called to acquiesce to the convience of the seller, which is sufficient reason to VOTE NO to amending the TSR. Whit Bollier