| Comment Number: | OL-103482 |
| Received: | 11/28/2004 11:30:36 AM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | nelson |
| State: | RI |
| Subject: | Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 310 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
To quote Chief Justice Berger-- "Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit. We categorically reject the argument that a vendor has a right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another. If this prohibition operates to impede the flow of even valid ideas, the answer is that no one has a right to press even 'good' ideas on an unwilling recipient. The asserted right of a mailer, we repeat, stops at the outer boundary of every person's domain." It is a matter of conSent not conTent. Why should I have to spend money on any machine or software product to protect my telephones or emails from receiving what doesn't have my conSent? If I choose to have a telephone or internet connection, thus, paying a monthly charge (my domain), I will decide what has my conSent. If I have an unlisted-unpublished telephone number (paying extra) and I am/or on the Do Not Call list why should ANYONE have the right to contact me by using computer generated numbers? If I am waiting for a call why should I have to pick up the telephone to hear a hangup? Even if I am not on the Do Not Call list it is still a matter of ConSent. If DMA wants to send ads they can use the USPS and help keep the the price of postage down. About time they gave something back.