|Received:||11/27/2004 6:35:16 PM|
|Subject:||Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 310|
Comments:As a consumer, I do not want any telemarketing calls made to my residence—especially prerecorded calls—regardless of any prior business relationship. I do not want telemarketing calls at all, period. Coming from this point of view, my comments will be horribly one-sided and will not even attempt to give credence to the arguments other side of the issue. I do not personally benefit from any of the espoused benefits of telemarketing, so a cost-benefit analysis of the issue is worthless from my perspective, as adopting the proposed measures would yield no benefits in my view. Nevertheless, while this view seems terribly stubborn and short-sided, I contend that the vast majority of those who are on the receiving end of telemarketing calls share this view. Needless to say, I do not support the proposed amendment to allow prerecorded calls to be delivered based on a prior relationship. As to the Direct Marketing Association's petition regarding the TSR's call abandonment safe harbor, I likewise urge against adopting the measure. It simply gives telemarketers more leeway with the practice of call abandonment. Why, under the proposal, a telemarketing firm, assuming that their call volume is consistent day-by-day, could devote almost an entire day to the practice of call abandonment, as long as they could ensure that the rest of the 30 day period was free of such calls. The practice of call abandonment costs my workplace a few minutes every day, which costs us a few hours of work over a 30 day pay-schedule. When multiplied across the numerous businesses that are forced to deal with this practice, the economic impact is considerable. The practice itself is an insidious way for telemarketing agencies to cut costs at the expense of the victims of this practice. Not only should these agencies not be given greater leeway in this practice, but the practice should be banned outright, and the use of mechanisms that facilitate non-human connection over If the TSR is to be amended, it should be amended to impose even stricter regulations on telemarketers. After placing my name on the Do Not Call Registry I started receiving calls at my home addressed to people who are not, and never have been associated with this number. When I inform them that such a person is not associated with this number, they start in on their sales pitch: "As long as I have you on the line, Michael..." Often times the people they are calling for aren't even in the phonebook (i.e. they're fictional people used as a pretext to get around the Do Not Call Registry imposed by the TSR). Until the Direct Marketing Association can fully operate under the current provisions of the TSR, they have no place petitioning for an amendment, and the FTC should not even consider it.