6 ms·

Federal judges have struck down an anti-robocall rule

50 points by joeyespo 9y ago

delecti 9y ago
I'm having trouble understanding what the motivation for such a rule could have been in the first place. Certainly cellphones can't be the origin of enough genuine robocalls for this to have been necessary to curb them.
- danso 9y ago
  Maybe they represented a small percentage of calls compared to traditional mass-callers, but smartphones gives everybody the capability of using software to automate phone activity.
whack 9y ago
Maybe the rule had good intentions, but I agree with the court's ruling. The rule, as written, is far too broad. "The FCC's 2015 decision said that a device meets the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) definition of an "autodialer" if it can be modified to make robocalls, even if the smartphone user hasn't actually downloaded an autodialing app. That interpretation treats all smartphones as autodialers because any smartphone has the capability of downloading an autodialing app, judges ruled. Since any call made by an autodialer could violate anti-robocall rules, this led to a troubling conclusion: judges said that an unwanted call from a smartphone could violate anti-robocall rules even if the smartphone user hasn't downloaded an autodialing app. Imagine, for instance, that a person wishes to send an invitation for a social gathering to a person she recently met for the first time. If she lacks prior express consent to send the invitation, and if she obtains the acquaintance's cell phone number from a mutual friend, she ostensibly commits a violation of federal law by calling or sending a text message from her smartphone to extend the invitation. And if she sends a group message inviting 10 people to the gathering, again without securing prior express consent from any of the recipients, she not only would have infringed the TCPA 10 distinct times but would also face a minimum damages recovery against her of $5,000."
- nonbel 9y ago
  >Imagine, for instance, that a person wishes to send an invitation for a social gathering to a person she recently met for the first time. If she lacks prior express consent to send the invitation, and if she obtains the acquaintance's cell phone number from a mutual friend, she ostensibly commits a violation of federal law by calling or sending a text message from her smartphone to extend the invitation. And if she sends a group message inviting 10 people to the gathering, again without securing prior express consent from any of the recipients, she not only would have infringed the TCPA 10 distinct times but would also face a minimum damages recovery against her of $5,000." Who wants to receive calls from a friend of a friend to invite them to a party? Why not ask the friend to invite their friend if you want them to come? This does sound like spammy behavior to me, yet these laws are clearly unsuitable. Maybe people should have an option to be paid some small amount for each call from a number not on their whitelist that they accept. It would also have the interesting consequence of creating a market for wasting the spammers time.
  - 8ytecoder 9y ago
    It's perfectly acceptable in social situations to get a number of friend from a friend to send them a text message or a phone call.
    - nonbel 9y ago
      >"It's perfectly acceptable in social situations to get a number of friend from a friend to send them a text message or a phone call." Sure, and I have done this many times. But if we append "to invite them to their party" to your statement it becomes "kind of weird". If we also add that they are doing this to many people at once, it becomes "even more strange".
      - landryraccoon 9y ago
        “Weird” should be enforced socially and not by making it a crime enforced by the government. If a friend of a friend texts you weirdly, tell your friend to tell them to knock it off. Getting the government involved is totally disproportionate.
horsecaptin 9y ago
Time to download that Robocall app and call the FCC about why this was a dumb idea.
plandis 9y ago
I’ll bet money that Ajit won’t do anything to curb VoIP robocallers. They are scamming money out of American consumers so that’s kind of a bummer.
lacker 9y ago
In practice, I am getting more and more robocalls nowadays on my cell phone, about one every couple days. I wish my phone had the ability to only pick up when it was a human-dialed call.
- millzlane 9y ago
  I've had amazing success with the "Should I answer?" App. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mistergroup.muzutozvednout&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mistergrou... >The database is built-up by the community of all users who have the application installed and/or visiting the application pages. The users can anonymously send ratings and reviews for public phone numbers (we do not collect info for private numbers) based on real answered calls. These ratings are stored in central server database where our admins can check them and after evaluation and approval the reviews with ranking are then distributed to all mobile phones with our application installed.
  - anomie31 9y ago
    Can I download this database?
ravenstine 9y ago
I get robocalls every single day. The problem is telecom companies don't care because even if we all turned off phone calls, we're still paying them for mobile internet. I've turned on call-rejection for all calls for a year now, and it's been fine. More people should do this.
r00fus 9y ago
Does anyone understand the implications of the revocation of the "one-call safe harbor"? Does this mean that if I switch numbers and I get a bunch of spam for the previous owner of that number, I have to go and opt-out all over again?
frankosaurus 9y ago
For me personally, robocalls outnumber legit call calls 10:1 these days. Interestingly, most robocalls I get come from numbers that match the first 6 digits of my own phone number. I don't know why they do that, but it makes it easier to screen calls.
- huntie 9y ago
  I was in the same boat, so I started just leaving my phone silenced all of the time. I almost never get robocalls anymore. Interestingly, it seems like whenever I turn my ringer on because I'm expecting a call I get a robocall. It's probably just coincidence though.
- jethro_tell 9y ago
  They do that because it makes it harder for me to screen calls, I have kids at schools where landlines will have the same first 6 digits, if I get a call like that, I assume that it's a garbage call but I have to answer it in case I need to pick up a child or go to the doctor.
  - ryandrake 9y ago
    Add a contact in your address book with the school’s number(s)? Sure there is still a small chance of collision with the spammers’ fake numbers, but it should help. My mobile gets an average of 3 robocalls a day, so I’m 100% whitelist at this point. If the caller’s number is not in my address book it gets ignored.
    - eridius 9y ago
      That requires you to actually know the number they'll be calling from though.
      - jethro_tell 9y ago
        Also, assumes that it's not a local teacher calling from a cell phone.
matt_wulfeck 9y ago
We’re quickly approaching a place where I’m ready to send all voice calls not in contacts to /dev/null. Not even voicemail, but to the ether. If a company wants to get ahold of me, they can send me an email or a text message.
- convolvatron 9y ago
  last two days I've gotten unsolicited sms messages, in batches of 5. one set from a woman supposedly looking for a good time, and the other political spam. i don't see any reason why sms isn't going to end up the same trash heap that email (try running a server without a filter) and voice have become
nokcha 9y ago
I'm annoyed that origin spoofing (i.e., falsified caller ID) is not blocked by the telecoms. It seems like it would be easy enough to do if mandated by Congress. And for incoming calls from foreign networks, at the least they could identify it as a non-US number.
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  Because there are legitimate uses for caller ID spoofing
  - nokcha 9y ago
    The only legitimate use is setting it to another number that you own. It would be relatively easy for telecoms to allow this but block all other falsification of caller ID.

50 points by joeyespo 9y ago

I'm having trouble understanding what the motivation for such a rule could have been in the first place. Certainly cellphones can't be the origin of enough genuine robocalls for this to have been necessary to curb them.

danso 9y ago
Maybe they represented a small percentage of calls compared to traditional mass-callers, but smartphones gives everybody the capability of using software to automate phone activity.

whack 9y ago

Maybe the rule had good intentions, but I agree with the court's ruling. The rule, as written, is far too broad. "The FCC's 2015 decision said that a device meets the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) definition of an "autodialer" if it can be modified to make robocalls, even if the smartphone user hasn't actually downloaded an autodialing app. That interpretation treats all smartphones as autodialers because any smartphone has the capability of downloading an autodialing app, judges ruled. Since any call made by an autodialer could violate anti-robocall rules, this led to a troubling conclusion: judges said that an unwanted call from a smartphone could violate anti-robocall rules even if the smartphone user hasn't downloaded an autodialing app. Imagine, for instance, that a person wishes to send an invitation for a social gathering to a person she recently met for the first time. If she lacks prior express consent to send the invitation, and if she obtains the acquaintance's cell phone number from a mutual friend, she ostensibly commits a violation of federal law by calling or sending a text message from her smartphone to extend the invitation. And if she sends a group message inviting 10 people to the gathering, again without securing prior express consent from any of the recipients, she not only would have infringed the TCPA 10 distinct times but would also face a minimum damages recovery against her of $5,000."

nonbel 9y ago
>Imagine, for instance, that a person wishes to send an invitation for a social gathering to a person she recently met for the first time. If she lacks prior express consent to send the invitation, and if she obtains the acquaintance's cell phone number from a mutual friend, she ostensibly commits a violation of federal law by calling or sending a text message from her smartphone to extend the invitation. And if she sends a group message inviting 10 people to the gathering, again without securing prior express consent from any of the recipients, she not only would have infringed the TCPA 10 distinct times but would also face a minimum damages recovery against her of $5,000." Who wants to receive calls from a friend of a friend to invite them to a party? Why not ask the friend to invite their friend if you want them to come? This does sound like spammy behavior to me, yet these laws are clearly unsuitable. Maybe people should have an option to be paid some small amount for each call from a number not on their whitelist that they accept. It would also have the interesting consequence of creating a market for wasting the spammers time.
- 8ytecoder 9y ago
  It's perfectly acceptable in social situations to get a number of friend from a friend to send them a text message or a phone call.
  - nonbel 9y ago
    >"It's perfectly acceptable in social situations to get a number of friend from a friend to send them a text message or a phone call." Sure, and I have done this many times. But if we append "to invite them to their party" to your statement it becomes "kind of weird". If we also add that they are doing this to many people at once, it becomes "even more strange".
    - landryraccoon 9y ago
      “Weird” should be enforced socially and not by making it a crime enforced by the government. If a friend of a friend texts you weirdly, tell your friend to tell them to knock it off. Getting the government involved is totally disproportionate.

horsecaptin 9y ago

Time to download that Robocall app and call the FCC about why this was a dumb idea.

plandis 9y ago

I’ll bet money that Ajit won’t do anything to curb VoIP robocallers. They are scamming money out of American consumers so that’s kind of a bummer.

lacker 9y ago

In practice, I am getting more and more robocalls nowadays on my cell phone, about one every couple days. I wish my phone had the ability to only pick up when it was a human-dialed call.

millzlane 9y ago
I've had amazing success with the "Should I answer?" App. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mistergroup.muzutozvednout&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mistergrou... >The database is built-up by the community of all users who have the application installed and/or visiting the application pages. The users can anonymously send ratings and reviews for public phone numbers (we do not collect info for private numbers) based on real answered calls. These ratings are stored in central server database where our admins can check them and after evaluation and approval the reviews with ranking are then distributed to all mobile phones with our application installed.
- anomie31 9y ago
  Can I download this database?

ravenstine 9y ago

I get robocalls every single day. The problem is telecom companies don't care because even if we all turned off phone calls, we're still paying them for mobile internet. I've turned on call-rejection for all calls for a year now, and it's been fine. More people should do this.

r00fus 9y ago

Does anyone understand the implications of the revocation of the "one-call safe harbor"? Does this mean that if I switch numbers and I get a bunch of spam for the previous owner of that number, I have to go and opt-out all over again?

frankosaurus 9y ago

For me personally, robocalls outnumber legit call calls 10:1 these days. Interestingly, most robocalls I get come from numbers that match the first 6 digits of my own phone number. I don't know why they do that, but it makes it easier to screen calls.

huntie 9y ago
I was in the same boat, so I started just leaving my phone silenced all of the time. I almost never get robocalls anymore. Interestingly, it seems like whenever I turn my ringer on because I'm expecting a call I get a robocall. It's probably just coincidence though.
jethro_tell 9y ago
They do that because it makes it harder for me to screen calls, I have kids at schools where landlines will have the same first 6 digits, if I get a call like that, I assume that it's a garbage call but I have to answer it in case I need to pick up a child or go to the doctor.
- ryandrake 9y ago
  Add a contact in your address book with the school’s number(s)? Sure there is still a small chance of collision with the spammers’ fake numbers, but it should help. My mobile gets an average of 3 robocalls a day, so I’m 100% whitelist at this point. If the caller’s number is not in my address book it gets ignored.
  - eridius 9y ago
    That requires you to actually know the number they'll be calling from though.
    - jethro_tell 9y ago
      Also, assumes that it's not a local teacher calling from a cell phone.

matt_wulfeck 9y ago

We’re quickly approaching a place where I’m ready to send all voice calls not in contacts to /dev/null. Not even voicemail, but to the ether. If a company wants to get ahold of me, they can send me an email or a text message.

convolvatron 9y ago
last two days I've gotten unsolicited sms messages, in batches of 5. one set from a woman supposedly looking for a good time, and the other political spam. i don't see any reason why sms isn't going to end up the same trash heap that email (try running a server without a filter) and voice have become

nokcha 9y ago

I'm annoyed that origin spoofing (i.e., falsified caller ID) is not blocked by the telecoms. It seems like it would be easy enough to do if mandated by Congress. And for incoming calls from foreign networks, at the least they could identify it as a non-US number.

colejohnson66 9y ago
Because there are legitimate uses for caller ID spoofing
- nokcha 9y ago
  The only legitimate use is setting it to another number that you own. It would be relatively easy for telecoms to allow this but block all other falsification of caller ID.