Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!problem!compus!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: DUI and Privacy Laws - was Re: Lotus Marketplace Message-ID: Date: 1 Dec 90 19:27:41 GMT References: <5010@rsiatl.UUCP> <86447@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <5022@rsiatl.UUCP> <1990Dec01.050052.25160@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 11 In article <1990Dec01.050052.25160@ddsw1.MCS.COM> zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) writes: > Yet Caller-ID isn't. What would happen to anonymous tips? Per-call blocking. With per-call and per-line blocking, and anonymous call blocking, everyone's rights are protected. In fact even without anonymous call blocking (where you can say "I don't want to recieve calls for which CID has been blocked") I'd rather allow CID blocking... it actually makes CID more useful. As it is you can't tell if the CID is not displayed because the person is blocking (by calling via the operator, for example) or out of range. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com