Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: convex!sneaky!gordon@uunet.uu.net (Gordon Burditt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 976- and 900- Phone Numbers
Message-ID: <11447@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 28 Aug 90 06:49:33 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Lines: 92
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 604, Message 1 of 9


>The whole point of 900/976 service is to provide a convenient "casual"
>means of billing for information providers, and to provide universal

This in of itself is objectionable when "causal" means billing the
wrong person and ignoring consumer protection.  Telephone companies
have considerably more clout in billing, and Information Providers
have no business piggybacking on the ability of telephone companies to
cut off a very basic and essential service (telephone service) and to
fall back on excuses that would sound extremely stupid outside the
telephone business.  Can you imagine MC Pizza claiming that you have
to pay for their pizza anyway, because by "mistake" they switched your
default pizza carrier to them, even though you ordered your pizzas
from AT & Pizza?  How often would Southwestern Pizza claim that they
can't remove the charge for Extra Roaches because the tarrifs won't
allow it?  And Sprint Pizza threatening to cut off your water if you
don't pay your pizza bill?

The California PUC states that no one has lost telephone service
because of delinquent 976/900 charges.  Is that a decision or a
statement of historical fact?  If it's not a decision with the force
of law, I'm not satisfied.  The bills should be separate, and the
bills for IP service should not be identifiable with a phone company.
And the only thing a consistently-overdue IP bill should do to your
phone service is demonstrate that you have intelligence not to pay it,
and therefore you don't need to put down a deposit for your phone
service.

I've got a great idea!  I have this home-improvement and repair
company.  I'll bill my services *ON YOUR ELECTRIC BILL*.  I think you
can imagine how renters who pay their own electric bill and are not
enthusiastic about paying for maintenance which the landlord is
supposed to pay will feel about that.  And my magazine publisher can
bill your subscription on your income tax - sorry about that mistake
that caused the IRS to seize your car.  Too bad the law won't let them
give it back.

>access to those services. Obviously, the moment you require a credit
>card, you have just excluded a significant number of people. You have
>also added a layer of billing complexity that would discourage some
>from entering the IP business. The original thought was that anyone

Um, you mean the people doing the billing might be able to find the IP
for legal service, and that would discourage some people from going
into the IP business?  Southwestern Bell says it won't reveal who's
behind 976 numbers even for people who have run up bills calling them.

>It actually is a good idea in its purest form. IMHO, most of the
>objection to these services is not related to the technical
>implementation of the billing at all, but rather to the generally
>sleazy material that has taken over the industry. A lot of people,
>rather than being "unhip" criticizing the content, have concocted
>objections to the CONCEPT of 900/976. I find this intellectually

If, by "sleazy material", you mean material that might be considered
"soft-pore cornography", I don't care.  In my view, there is very
little pornography in the world, and what little there is has been
enacted into law by various legislatures under the category "obscenity
laws", and other forms of censorship.

976/900 numbers encourage a sleazy way of doing business.  You can't
know the cost when you receive the information.  If the ad lied about
the charge, the phone company can hide behind the tarrifs.  There is
no customer service number to complain if all you heard was dead
silence instead of the material you wanted.  Phone companies let the
IPs hide behind them without revealing their identities, but they can
harass you with bills.  If there was a way to deliver drugs over the
telephone, the drug dealers would be in seventh heaven.  They'd never
have to face quality complaints from customers.

On many numbers, the charge happens when you connect, but the
information is useless unless they can get information from you, like
your address (all those lines for getting a credit card or a loan)
because the real service is delivered later by mail.  Between that
time, the call can disconnect, or an impasse can be reached: "We don't
deliver to P.O. boxes" "But I don't have anything else!"  "Sorry
(click)(bye bye $$)".

>a long way. And in all these years, I have yet to lose a dime to the
>900/976 crowd. It's not really that hard to avoid.

I doubt it.  How much have businesses had to spend, in self-defense,
on equipment to block numbers like this?  (976 numbers have been
around a lot longer than free blocking of them) You don't suppose they
might pass on some of the extra cost to their customers, do you?  And
how about all the time telco customer service people spend removing
charges?  I bet the cost of extra people finds its way into the cost
of residential phone service.


		Gordon L. Burditt
		sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon