|Received:||11/27/2004 7:58:01 PM|
|Subject:||Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 310|
Comments:My family signed up for the National do not call registry after being part of the New York state do not call registry for several years. This registry is a bridge of trust for not receiving phone calls. The people who signed up do not want to receive phone calls. The Chicago Times article (http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-fone27.html) states this proposal will "to allow companies to deliver 'pre-recorded message telemarketing.'' While people would be able to opt-out when called, this system does not work. That is why the do not call registry was created in the first place. Forcing people to opt-out puts the burden and cost (time) on them. Further, people who let the answering machine pick up all calls are forced to listen to ads on the machine. This also fills up answering machine space, causing real messages to get through. In the proposal, it states that only companies with "an established business relationship" can call. Companies with an established business relationship, are already legally allowed to call. My bank calls frequently. (I wish they wouldn't, but that's not the point of this comment.) However, at least the bank is required to pretend that their call is related to the account I currently have. This proposal sounds like it allows them to call about virtual everything just because I have an account there. In conclusion, the DMA is asking for permission for people who have explicitly requested not to be called. These people have stated the telephone is not an acceptable form of advertising. Why should they have the burden of dealing with these unwanted calls?