Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: asuvax!gtephx!loki!ellisond@ncar.ucar.edu (Dell Ellison) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller ID Privacy Question Message-ID: Date: 1 Sep 89 14:17:06 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: gte Lines: 37 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 342, message 9 of 10 In article , buster!rli@uunet.uu.net (Buster Irby) writes: > The point here is that *you* are not entitled to my unlisted phone number > just because I placed a call to an identifying device which you happened to > be standing next to. However, if I am making harrassing calls, the > receipient of the call should be able to identify me to the phone company, > ala the code names/numbers. I do not see any reason why the Caller ID device > cannot provide the required calling party id without finding it necessary to > divulge an unlisted phone number. > Buster Irby rli@buster > [Moderator's Note: However, some of us feel that we have the right to know > the identity of the caller -- not necessarily recognize the caller -- just > know the identity of the person ringing our bell. We feel you don't have > the right to know our number and be able to ring it at will while at the > same time witholding your own, preventing us from calling you. PT] We all have the right to Freedom... As long as our freedom does not take away the Freedom of someone else! In other words, I have the Freedom to swing my arm, but my Freedom stops BEFORE my fist hits the end of your nose. You should have the right to not get hit in the nose. I hope my analogy is fairly obvious. But just in case it isn't ... I have the right to call you, but you have the right to know who is calling. The closest thing we have to that is our phone number. (telephone medium) I agree with the moderator.