Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: siegman@sierra.stanford.edu (siegman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 976- and 900- Phone Numbers
Message-ID: <11369@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 26 Aug 90 01:38:53 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 24
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 597, Message 2 of 11


>I'd like the thoughts and opinions of other telecom readers to help me
>focus my thinking) to for the opinion that the only thing phone
>companies should be allowed to stick on your phone bill is the cost of
>telephone calls.

1) I _strongly_ agree with your thinking on this (even if you feel
your own thoughts on the subject are not yet "fully focused").  The
_only_ thing I want from the phone company, or on my phone bill, is
telephone service.  If they're going to serve as a collection agency
for other services, then it should be on a separate bill; and it
should be clear it's independent of my telephone service.

2) On a related track, if I'm supposed to pay a 900 provider for
services, there must be a contract between us.  I've asked repeatedly:
When and how does a contract between us get created?  Should just
dialing a phone number -- whether knowingly, or unknowingly -- be able
to create a contract, under which I have to pay the provider?  I don't
think so!  The service should have to say, on _every_ call, "There's a
charge for this service, do you want it?  If so, do...".

Wm. Baxter, one of the main sources of all these headaches, is back as
a law school professor at my own university.  Like to see what he
thinks of all this one of these days...