Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!bionet!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: friedl@mtndew.tustin.ca.us (Steve Friedl)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Messages
Message-ID: <12263@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 17 Sep 90 01:10:48 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: VSI*FAX Tech Ctr, Tustin, CA
Lines: 39
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 654, Message 4 of 12


Michael P. Deignan tells of his "special" answering machine tape that
sounds like

	"<beep> The number you have reached ...
	 <number> has been disconnected..."

David Appell responds:

>    My housemate did this once, and the confusion it caused among
> callers, and their queries to the phone company, ultimately caused NJ
> Bell to call him and tell him, "Hey, just cut it out, OK."

What *legal* authority does the telco have to stop this kind of thing?
I believe that "cut it out please" is entirely reasonable for them,
and I am not looking to pick a fight with my local telco, I am just
curious what basis they have for recourse, if any.


Stephen J. Friedl, KA8CMY / I speak for me only / Tustin, CA / 3B2-kind-of-guy
+1 714 544 6561  / friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US  / {uunet,attmail}!mtndew!friedl


[Moderator's Note: What *legal* authority they have to stop such a
message resides in the tariffs which address the problem of
subscribers who cause interference with the service given to other
subscribers. Since most subscribers -- relatively unsophisticated in
telephony -- would associate the tones and message text with an
'official' announcement regards the status of the line, it is
reasonable to assume the other subscribers would be confused by what
they heard, causing them to expend money (on additional calls to
Enquiries) and time (in consulting with the operator and the business
office) to detirmine what was going on. While the operator attempted
to place the call for the subscriber, she would be unavailable to
assist other subscribers. Thus a degradation in the service provided
to other subscribers. And since most subscribers would reasonably
associate the tones and message text with telco, telco could claim
that the person making such an announcement over the phone was
falsely claiming to represent, or speak for the company.    PAT]