Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: buster!rli@uunet.uu.net (Buster Irby) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller ID Privacy Question Message-ID: Date: 3 Sep 89 01:45:33 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: Public Access Unix, Stafford, Tx Lines: 38 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 344, message 4 of 8 Several people including the moderator seem to disagree with my earlier posting on this subject, I even got some personal mail from Peter at ficc on it. The problem is that they all have missed the point of my statement, so let me explain it further. First of all, a device which displays an incoming phone number can be visible to anyone who walks by or happens to be in the vicinity. This may not necessarily be the person to whom I placed the phone call, and could possibly be a person whom I would not want to have my phone number. Access to *my* unlisted phone number is something which *I* pay for and which *I* control, not anyone else. I see no problem in displaying a unique code number which can be used to identify the calling party if the call is of an undesirable nature. Remember, the purpose of the device we are discussing is to identify the calling party, not to enable you to return the call! One of the features of the calling party id device is the ability for *you* to screen your incoming calls and stop people from harassing you. This can be done by simply blocking their code/phone number. Must I give up my right to have an unlisted phone number just because someone wants to be able to return an harassing phone call? I think that a much more adult approach to solving the problem is to block any future calls from that party, not to return them. Returning an obscene or harassing phone call can only escalate the problem further. After all, does anyone really believe that they have the right to know my salary, how old I am, what religion I practice, what color I am, or what my phone number is just because I called them on the phone. I think not. -- Buster Irby rli@buster [Moderator's Note: I wonder why no one has yet suggested simply having the device transmit the *name* of the caller, rather than the phone number, since this would (a) identify the caller by the name under which the telco carried him in its records; (b) probably be the same name under which I had made your aquaintence; and (c) protect the private phone number of the caller. In other words, the little box would read out, "Dr. Brown at home" or "Smith Telemarketing Co." etc...the same purpose would be served. PT]