3 ms·

> I'm not too familiar with what the Supreme Court did with TCPA ... June 24, 2021 - https://www.natlawreview.com/article/ripple-effects-supreme-court-s-tcpa-d

by shagie 4y ago

> I'm not too familiar with what the Supreme Court did with TCPA ... June 24, 2021 - https://www.natlawreview.com/article/ripple-effects-supreme-court-s-tcpa-decision-still-developing-companies-using-auto https://www.natlawreview.com/article/ripple-effects-supreme-... > If you work in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) space, you are certainly aware of the landmark unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court in Facebook v Duguid, in which the Court narrowed the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) to equipment that has the capacity to either store or produce numbers using a random or sequential number generator. > ... > On June 10, 2021, the District Court for the District of South Carolina held that the Aspect predictive dialer did not qualify as an ATDS because the evidence proved that the system could neither randomly nor sequentially store or produce numbers to be dialed --- So, if you're working from a list of numbers, it's not an ATDS. It is only an ATDS if you're dialing random numbers or sequential numbers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook,_Inc._v._Duguid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook,_Inc._v._Duguid > The Supreme Court's ruling was seen to be favorable to the telemarketing industry, since the decision narrowed the definition of an automatic dialing system of which are regulated under the TCPA. As few actual automated dialers in use at the time of the decision incorporate the random or sequential number generator, telemarketers would be able to use other automatic dialing systems that do not meet this definition to engage in their business, according to the National Consumer Law Center. The National Consumer Law Center as well as Consumer Reports expressed concern that there would be a significant increase in unwanted telemarketing calls due to this decision. > Senator Ed Markey, one of the authors of the TCPA, along with Representative Anna Eshoo, called the ruling "disastrous", as the Congressional intent of the TCPA was "to ban dialing from a database", and announced the same day of the decision that they would be looking to introduce amended legislation to address the Court's decision.

CWuestefeld 4y ago
As described here, it seems like Congress has every opportunity to clarify the definition of ATDS. Surely they deserve as much blame as the Court, then.
- shagie 4y ago
  The specific part of the law is: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 > (1) The term “automatic telephone dialing system” means equipment which has the capacity— (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers.
- guelo 4y ago
  Congress has been purposefully broken by Republican's new requirement that all legislation must receive supermajority approval in the senate. It's part of a coordinated plan to "drown the federal government in a bathtub": the courts read legislation as narrowly as possible while congress is unable to legislate.
  - shagie 4y ago
    I'm not sure a wider reading of the TCPA is possible for the definition of an automatic dialing system. Is there any other way the courts could read the definition provided in https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 ?
    - crhulls 4y ago
      Look up Edelson, they are the troll firm that sued us. They have had significant success taking much wider interpretations of the law. Just like patent trolls they also assume most people will just settle - we did not but it was a gamble. Here are some of the cases they brag about: https://edelson.com/inside-the-firm/905-2/ https://edelson.com/inside-the-firm/905-2/
    - CWuestefeld 4y ago
      Thanks for looking that up. Yeah, from what's quoted here, it's perfectly transparent. (1) The term “automatic telephone dialing system” means equipment which has the capacity— (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers. Anybody who's claiming the Court is playing games here clearly has an agenda of their own. Congress dropped the ball.
labster 4y ago
If that’s their interpretation of an obvious law to stop something 99% of people hate, I’m sure glad the Supreme Court doesn’t get to interpret the Constitution.
- shagie 4y ago
  The law very clearly specifics what an automatic dialer is in https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 > (1) The term “automatic telephone dialing system” means equipment which has the capacity— (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers.

by shagie 4y ago

CWuestefeld 4y ago

As described here, it seems like Congress has every opportunity to clarify the definition of ATDS. Surely they deserve as much blame as the Court, then.

shagie 4y ago
The specific part of the law is: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 > (1) The term “automatic telephone dialing system” means equipment which has the capacity— (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers.
guelo 4y ago
Congress has been purposefully broken by Republican's new requirement that all legislation must receive supermajority approval in the senate. It's part of a coordinated plan to "drown the federal government in a bathtub": the courts read legislation as narrowly as possible while congress is unable to legislate.
- shagie 4y ago
  I'm not sure a wider reading of the TCPA is possible for the definition of an automatic dialing system. Is there any other way the courts could read the definition provided in https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 ?
  - crhulls 4y ago
    Look up Edelson, they are the troll firm that sued us. They have had significant success taking much wider interpretations of the law. Just like patent trolls they also assume most people will just settle - we did not but it was a gamble. Here are some of the cases they brag about: https://edelson.com/inside-the-firm/905-2/ https://edelson.com/inside-the-firm/905-2/
  - CWuestefeld 4y ago
    Thanks for looking that up. Yeah, from what's quoted here, it's perfectly transparent. (1) The term “automatic telephone dialing system” means equipment which has the capacity— (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers. Anybody who's claiming the Court is playing games here clearly has an agenda of their own. Congress dropped the ball.

labster 4y ago

If that’s their interpretation of an obvious law to stop something 99% of people hate, I’m sure glad the Supreme Court doesn’t get to interpret the Constitution.

shagie 4y ago
The law very clearly specifics what an automatic dialer is in https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227 > (1) The term “automatic telephone dialing system” means equipment which has the capacity— (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers.