Much has been written in articles and forums in Boycott-RIAA.com about the blatant corruption of our political and judicial systems in the last several years by special interests of all types, manifested in this realm in the green light given the RIAA to declare open season on consumers with tactics which, if employed by a tin-pot dictatorship against political dissidents, pro-democracy activists and independent journalists, would rightly be called “human rights violations” and lead to pushes for tighter economic sanctions against the country/countries in question.

But alas, alack, the RIAA is not alone in this regard of big-money influence corrupting politicians and judges. Now comes word that, on Wednesday, Oklahoma City–based U.S. District (read: kangaroo) Court Judge Lee West effectively ruled the Federal Trade Commission’s “Do Not Call” registry invalid, thus leaving some 50 million Americans once again at the mercy of predatory telemarketers so obsessed with making profit$$$ for the companies they work for that they would knowingly and recklessly disregard the life patterns of parents struggling to raise their children, families sharing a quiet meal at the dinner table, other businesses seeking to carry out their work, and so on. In retaliation for this latest profits-before-people-über-alles ruling, some consumer groups placed Judge West’s home and office telephone numbers on the Web.

Interestingly, the day before the ruling, CNBC (the same chicken outfit for which ex-RIAA czarina Hilary Rosen now does commentary) ran a piece shedding crocodile tears for all the tele-stalkers (not just for corporations, but for political candidates), claiming that the Do-Not-Call rule would lead to millions more jobs being lost, thus further hobbling the economy. (Yeah, right.) The “pest industry” (as NewsMax so descriptively calls them) has been fighting the national registry tooth and nail and, like the equally arrogant and tone-deaf RIAA, couldn’t care less that the public is fed up with them. There have also been efforts to put so many loopholes in the Do-Not-Call registry that the telemarketing lobby could literally tie a shoelace with and through them.

Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.), Chairman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, and Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) responded thusly: “Contrary to the court's decision, we firmly believe Congress gave the FTC authority to implement the national do-not-call list. . . . We will continue to monitor the situation and will take whatever legislative action is necessary to ensure consumers can stop intrusive calls from unwanted telemarketers.” (Hmmm . . . Billy Tauzin. Isn’t he the one who’s been on deck, over the last year, to take over either the RIAA or MPAA? Just asking.)

This writer would be interested to hear which, if any, of the telemarketers any of you received calls from were tied in to the music or entertainment (as in what-passes-for) industries.

Disney. A lot.

That's one down. Another example of hand-in-glove.

Disney calls several times per week with a pre-recorded message to call a toll-free number 800-630-4035
War dialers anyone??? Put that 56k modem to good use.

Im glad I signed up for the Nat'l do not call list. I suggest everyone do the same. I signed up in August, but you can still get on the list here: http://www.donotcall.gov

I liked what somebody on cnn, Lou Dobbs' program said, "Its not about the right to free speach, its the about the right not to listen."

I am avoiding that list like the plague. My number has been unlisted since I got it and I don't give it out to anyone. Consequently, the only calls I get are from automatic dialers and since I have caller ID, I don't answer them. I get very, very few calls that aren't from friend or family. With all the loopholes that have been added to the Do-Not-Call-(except) list, my phone would probably start ringing off the hook.

I use a cell phone, they can suck it....

"50 million Americans can't be wrong" We should hold old Billy Tauzin to those words. 60 million American file sharers are criminals in there eyes, blatent double standards of right and wrong by majority vote (ie..use) Privacy standards on Telemarketers should also apply to the RIAA, if you sign up for the do not call registry you are in fact signing up for the demolishment of one of the most parasitic businesses that exist (only next to RIAA and their recording labels). If the everyday man can say no to the invasion of privacy that is telemarketing then they sure as @$*# should be able to say NO to paying corporations for a substandard form of art that is attempting to stiffle the evolution of the very thing they sell.

Think about it -- for any company or group that qualifies for a loophole, this is like a huge shopping list which is not only free, it's required!

Yeah, Tauzin was mentioned as a replacement for Valenti. He listens to the RIAA, but he won't listen to the ATA. And as someone mentioned in another thread, he said "50 million Americans can't be wrong" when referring to the do not call list, but 60 million Americans are wrong when they download music.
I wonder if this would be a compromise that would make the RIAA happy:
A "Do Not Download" List.
(I live in Tauzin's district, so I am already telling everyone I know not to vote for him next year.)

I wish I could live my entire life saying one thing and doing another, but unfortunatly I'm not that rich....

RopeaDope, you are soooo right. When 60 million people are involved...especially when it is something in a gray area like file-sharing...it is a clear indication that something needs to change.

So let me get this straight - A judge located in podunk USA (that's the scientific name for Oklahoma), an area which already has a state sponsored "Do-Not-Call" list has arbritrarily decided that the national version is not valid??? But the state version is ok????

Second poser - "This is going to lose jobs" Is it proper justification for keeping something so intrusive and unwanted by every normal person just because jobs will be lost? Jobs that would not be there except for a group of people who have no respect for others, nor consideration for anyone elses rights, privacy, or anything else??? Does the governments inability to stop counting their contribution dollars long enough to do their jobs make this type of activity acceptable??

GET OUT!!! VOTE, VOTE, VOTE, NON-INCUMBENT...

I wonder how many jobs have been/will be lost to the anti-spam laws.

Does it matter? Its not going to be millions(because who listens to Tele-marketers), and anyways, the people out of a job, are parasites as was stated.

Why isn't the RICO Act being used against these rat-bastards?

And as far as exterminating the pest industry goes, perhaps they should enlist Tom DeLay to get rid of them, after all, he is the pest chemical sniffing specialist!

In a recent newsflash on MSN regarding this 'Do Not Call' registry, someone was quoted as saying that while approx. 50 million people had signed up, they expected to get up to 60 million people by the end of the year.

Now, haven't I seen that 60 million figure somewhere else?

Oh, yes. Many times. And RopeaDope mentions it in an earlier comment above.

It comes down to the liberal "we are going to loose too many jobs" argument (Not unlike in Oregon where its illegal to pump your own gas, just so somebody can have that job). Whatever happened to the ideals of this country's begining, in which the survival of the smartest, most ingenious, hardest working would have the chance to reach the penical of success? Instead it has de-evolved into that we see today, if there is a better idea....kill it, and keep doing what we have done before. For gosh sakes it may mean someone will have to find a job that dosn't include pi$$ing me off! Stagnation has never worked in nature. Lets bring down the pillers of dogma and let the evolution shine in.

Judge Lee West's home phone should be posted on this website so we all can call him during dinner time.

"just so somebody can have that job" (RopeaDope) Same in NJ

All those minimum wage telemarketer jobs gone...what a pity. Most of the jobs are $5.15 per hour + commission ( this is what a telemarketer in Cedar Rapids, IA quoted me, they had a big "now hiring" banner in front of their office so I called. ) They will just have to get a job at MCI's inbound call center instead... Or GEICO...

The bigger they are, the harder they fall...

~Jigga~

oldies1 said: "Second poser - "This is going to lose jobs" Is it proper justification for keeping something so intrusive and unwanted by every normal person just because jobs will be lost?"

"intrusive and unwanted"...Now why does this make me think of the RIAA?

I wouldn't know who they are when they call me. I usually hang up without a word. Except for MCI they always manage to tell me their name before I can hit the ol receiver button

I don't think this is really a big deal... First of all, federal law supercedes state level. Second, this judge only has the ability to rule within his own jurisdiction. Not to mention the case can be appealed and his idiotic ideals can be thrown out. So if your in Oklahoma, well thats a shame, you might need to continue to feed an unnessesary industry. What ever happened to free trade? Last time I checked free doesn't mean free for all. It means business and society is free to interact without restriction. Why then does our government need to build laws that force certain types of interaction. Freedom is more than just the ability to make your own decisions. It is the ability to take responsability for your choices. This is something our government has jammed down our throets for hundreds of years. However, they forgot to tell the corporations the same thing. Aparently freedom to them is the right to make their own choices and force us into living with them. Stuff like this makes me sick.

I agree with delete about the donotcall list being a big free list for telemarketers to call. I used to be a telemarketer in college (don't hate.) Anyway, f-the-riaa, most telemarketers don't even make the $5.15 an hour. Some get below minimum wage for those calls.

I hated calling folks homes. I realize that telemarketers are only doing their jobs and all...but, it still stinks when you're expecting an important call and all the sudden you pick it up and it's a telemarketer on the end.

As for Hilary Rosen boo-hooing about telemarketers...the only reason she's upset is because the RIAA-owned companies DO make telemarketing calls to push their products. I know because I was once a member of a music club. (I know, ick.) Anyway, I dropped it quickly after the first month, and then...the telemarketing phone calls started. The music clubs would have their telemarketers make a courtesy call to try to drag me back into the club with the promise of more free music cds, etc;. It was a rip off.

Um, on a side note, I think that music clubs are no better than people's burned copies of cds. I remember getting a cd from the BMG music club once, and even after five copies..the cd had the same flaw at the end of the cd. I returned it, but they never got it right... So, I gave up.

Their is good news here though. 2 days after the judge ruled that the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) does not have the right to enforce a 'do not call' list, the house of representatives voted (412-to EXPLICITLY give the FTC the necessary authority. The senate is also expected to pass the bill today, and the list should go into effect on October 1 as planned. *crowds rejoicing*

HOT OFF THE PRESSES!!! Good for a laugh if nothing else... So much for the not so honorable Judge West's opinion... Hope McDonalds is still hiring!!

wow, 412-8. If only they did that for 50 million, what would they do for 60 million?

On a side note, who were the 8?

Sorry, guess I should have included the link... (Another damn telemarketer calling me while I'm typing...

http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-judge0925,0,7075268.story?coll=ny-business-headlines

And another inquiry: Of those eight who voted against the Do-Not-Call measure, which ones are also RIAA / MPAA stooges?

But thank y'all for straightening me on which job Mr. Tauzin was up for. And I do agree that his stance on telemarketers vs. the RIAA situation reeks of the worst hypocrisy.

And never once have they ever offered me anything I'm even remotely interested in!

Where the heck do they get these "Federal" judges anyway? Is it in their job description to go against the will of the people, and just generally tick everybody off?

We'll lose to many jobs. Who is we? Is Hillary Rosen from India? Telemarketing has increasingly moved off-shore, the jobs argument is totally bogus. I believe we have actually seen one of those rare instances of Congress doing the right thing. As far judges being completely out of control, 9th Circuit Federal District Court, they think they are a legislature. 50 million sign up on the do not call list, probably a lot more would but have not yet. 60 million people use peer to peer, but many of them probably do not know about this project, any thoughts on how to reach them? Numbers alone do not create political clout, you need to have an organized focused message, and a good way to deliver it, like a full time lobbyist or two (which takes money or time)

So when did it all change from the concept of me buying something that you are selling to me buying something that you are loaning to me with many stipulations, and implied permission to monitor? Ever read the license agreement for visualware products? Go to www.visualware.com and check out the license agreement. Of course the only whay you'll ever get to see it is just before you click the 'take my money' button...

Simple. A deliberate usurpation of all our rights in this regard.

I don't know which politicians are in the RIAA's pocket, but here's a list of who voted against the "do not call" list:
Bishop (UT)
Meek (FL)
Strickland (OH)
Cannon (?)
Paul (TX)
Terry (AL)
Flake (AZ)
Ryan (OH)
(5 repub, 3 dem)
I couldn't find any info on WHY they voted against it. Sorry

No Senators voted against the bill, so it's back on schedule for Oct 1.

Goobie,
They all have call centers in their districts.

I am shocked by the comments here. You complain about the RIAA and its efforts to pass legislation controlling what we can do with our computers, yet you support legislation that controls who a business can call. I don't care if telemarketers are the scum of the earth - they have a right to free speech and to call who they want, just like we have the right to get the music we want. Shame! Shame! Shame! I don't like telemarketers, but I am certainly not going to go crying to the government for protection. That is what the RIAA does!

I completey agree with you dinibub. I do not believe every person who is employed in such a service takes maglinant pleasure in their occupation. Some malcontent individuals may, and the RIAA and other businesses might exploit it, but what system exists without corruption? There are no absolutisms.

Dinibub

You raise an interesting question here, which probably belongs in forums, and that question is how much, if at all should industry or communications mediums be regulated? And under what conditions? Are we being inconsistent if we support a goverment run Do Not Call list and oppose the RIAA in it's efforts to sue consumers with information obtained through procedures of dubious legality and decicded immorality?

Since I pay a phone bill, and I have the right to block individual numbers and annonymous numbers, in fact I pay for these services, I should have the right to opt out of being called by direct marketers. Since the telecommunications industry has not sorted this problem out themselves, and the people marketing privacy services and devices are losing the technological battle, I personally believe that a do not call list is "necessary and proper to promote the general welfare" of the nation.

On another front, the first ammendment grants the rights of free expression, assembly, practice of religion, and association. It does not grant you the right to an audience.

My 2 cents

If i'm paying my phone bill so I can to to PEOPLE I WANT TO TALK TO, without being pestered, why should they have the rights to harrass me?? What if i called up someone harrassing them all the time? I would have the cops called on me! I'm all for telemarketers if they pay half of my phone bill because about half of all the calls i get are from those rude jerk offs! Not to mention i have caller id and whenever they call it says it's an unknown #.. if i do answer it i have to say hello 5 times before someone answers because of automated dialers. From now on if the phone rings i don't answer it unless the caller id tells me whoever it is, and if i do pick up the phone by accident i tell them to F*ck off and hang up even before they get two words out.. F*ckers

To address dinibub, the difference is that i pay for my phone bill as i pay for my broadband and I do not like outside sources abusing things i pay for.. so actually, this is extremely consistent on my boycott of the RIAA!

Dinibub, "Its not about the right to free speach, its the about the right not to listen."

A problem here in our nation that needs to be addressed is the fact that the courts are allowing businesses freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is for individuals, not corporations!!! An individual telemarketer, calling me from their house and not promoting their business is fine, but a telemarketer calling me while working for and promoting his company is wrong!!!! These people are EVIL!!!!! We are constantly being advertised to. It's everywhere, it's in our art, it's in our sports, on our TV, it's in our schools and I'll be god darned if I'll have it calling me up on my PHONE!!! These are corporations doing this to us, not individuals, and they need to be stopped. I'm one of the 50 million on that list. I viewed it as more of a petition against these corrupt business practices more than anything else. I have an unlisted phone number and have not been receiving any more calls than I usually do, so don't be afraid to sign up. The businesses in this nation are out of control, we need to get them back in line, and I think it's going to be up to people like us that make that happen.

~goingnova

The do not call list is a form of not listening, the telemarketers can say whatever they want, but those on the list just dont want to listen...

im very glad im on that do not call list

they are mean especailly when u have 56k modem :\ they kick us off all the time and thry have the guts to call at 4-5 in the morning finnally me and my mom got sick and tired of it and we went on the do not call list

One of the problems that this shows is that our court systems have been encouraged through work-a-rounds to try and mandate legally what could not be passed into law through legistature. The cigarette lawsuits are a case in point. Unable to stop the spread of tobacco consumption it was decided that seeking recompense for the treatment costs of users would hit them in the wallet. No, it hits the users in the wallet.

I have not bothered to sign that do no call list. They don't bother me, simply because I lead a recluse life and don't need to answer my phone. I answer only for those that have arranged for the call at a certain time. Other than that, my ringer stays off. I pay for the right to use my phone and resent others that enfringe on that right. No different for my internet connection. I resent spam occupying my time, I resent spyware using the bandwidth I pay for for something I don't want. These pest industries, no matter how they cry, know that they are wrong. Much like the RIAA, they cry for the lost income (that they were not paying in large amounts to begin with) but it is not lost income that is the sore point. It is control, as always.

Cell phones & caller groups work wonders. My phone won't ring if the number on the other end isn't in my phone book. It'll show a missed call & the number, but if a message isn't left, then screw 'em.

I think there seems to be some confusion in roles and responsibilitis front of our lovely public servants. At last check it was congress who makes the laws. The entire judiciary system from the supreme court to the police force exists to enforce those laws put in place by congress. Did I miss another memo???!!!

All this talk about rights - The telemarketers or the riaa. In any conflict there are always two sides, each of those sides has rights. Is your right to free speech any more important than my right to privacy? Is your right to protect your product more important than my right to privacy?

How far must I run away before you get the message I don't want to hear what you have to say? I turned off the T.V., I turned off the radio, I canceled my subscription to the paper, now you are calling me on my phone. I need the phone, what can I do to be free of you merchandising?! You've already confined me to my home, now I'm not even safe there! I can't afford a ticket on the next shuttle - of course if enough people used that escape then the telemarketers would find a way to exploit that audience also. They are out of control and need to be reigned in.

This is a debate to decide who's rights are more important. In the end they are equally important or there is absolutely no reason to have any rights at all. Get rid of all the rights and laws and everything else that holds the fabric of a civilized existance together and we will live in anarchy, survival of the fittest. Personally I believe the one governing truth that is being overlooked is this: you have the right to exercise your rights until they begin to invade the rights of another. At that very point, unless both parties take equal steps to rectify the situation the very freedom that those rights represent has been lost. Just because a group of 100 people exercise a right agains one person does give a 100x multiplier to the value of their right over the one person. It remains a one-one comparison.

It is becoming more and more apparent to the average American that copyright law in principal is very different than what it is in practice. People have been openly reproducing music since - well since I can remember. When something is done a certain way for as long as the reproduction of music has it becomes the norm. No written law or anything else is going to alter that fact. Any law that is so out of touch with reality and the way people go through their daily lives is going to need a massive educational promotion over a long period of time to succeed. I'm very tempted to use the 'if 50 million people can't be wrong then how come 60 million can?' question here but will refrain because these are two distinct and different issues.

Telemarketing is an invasion of privacy, period.

Current file sharing issues are:
1. A parties (the riaa) attempt to enforce their interpretation of a law in principle which is significantly different than that same law in practice.
2. Justification of an invasion of privacy using that same interpretation of a law in principle with no regard to the inevitable confusion on the part of the "average consumer" as they live and abide by law in practice.

Just because a group of 100 people exercise a right agains one person does give a 100x multiplier to the value of their right over the one person. It remains a one-one comparison.

SHOULD READ

Just because a group of 100 people exercise a right agains one person does NOT give a 100x multiplier to the value of their right over the one person. It remains a one-one comparison.

Telemarketers, when they call, find out who they are and if they have a toll-free number...tell them that you are interested but are in the shower, etc... and that you will call back...if they do...those 56k modems can be pressed into service as war dialers. Many will represent a well known business in which you can war-dial the main switchboard and snarl it up. Remember, the dime's on them with toll free numbers.
As for free speech, it only applies to the public forum, you don't have free speech rights on private property, I.E., the property owner can tell you to get off his/her land. You also can't use a huge bullhorn and blast the sound onto private property because in most states you will be cited for disturbing the peace.

FIGHT BACK PEOPLE:

IF the JUDGES don't care that OTHERS' privacy is being invaded, then they shouldn't care about getting 50 million calls at home invading HIS privacy, either!

The Honorable Lee R. West
Senior United States District Judge
Western District of Oklahoma
U.S. Courthouse
200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Rm 3001, Courtroom 303, Third Floor
Chambers Telephone: 405-609-5140



Nottingham Edward Us District Judge

1929 Stout St
DENVER, CO 80294
303-844-5018
303-844-5018

Nottingham's fax#303.335.2155

DMA(Direct Marketing Ass)
Homepage: http://www.the-dma.org
Phone: 212-768-7277
DMA president extension: 1604

American Telemarketings (ATA)at
- http://www.ataconnect.org/salesrule.htm
- 1-866-500-4272

i got bent over a barrel by telemarketers: i was getting 3-5 calls a day but was usually at work. when i did get the calls it would start out with a pre-recorded pitch which i always hung up on with out listening to it. i was just about to call my phone company and put a privacy block on my phone to the tune of 4.95 a month when i stopped to listen to the recording.......it was my phone company trying to sell me extra services.....including a privacy block!!!!
after about 6 very irate calls to the phone company informing them that ill be damned if i will pay them 4.95 a month to stop calling me, the calls finally stopped.
just thought you might enjoy hearing about that little marketing ploy.
i believe in free trade.....sell your stuff in a store, advertise in the paper, on the internet, whatever.
but do NOT invade my home without being asked ie: lets stop telemarketing, bulk mailings (unless subscribed to), door to door sales (include religion in this one) and SPAM e-mail. those are my thoughts. thanks for taking the time to read them