Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Fri, 26 Apr 91 11:42:14 EDT From: Steve Baumgarten Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Restricting Telemarketers Reply-To: baumgart@esquire.dpw.com Message-ID: Organization: TELECOM Digest Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 309, Message 12 of 12 Lines: 22 In Telecom 11/301, Ron Greenberg (rig@eng.umd.edu) writes: > On the local end, there is a bill pending in the DC city council to > prohibit use of automated dialing machines for soliciting people > without a preexisting relationship. [...] > Unfortunately, I think these state (or district) bills are limited to > intrastate calls. [...] I wish we'd do something like this in New York City -- I get weekly calls urging me to "Call 540-SCAM within 30 minutes to get yourself ripped off!" (the 540 exchange is New York Telephone's local equivalent of 1-900 numbers). I rarely get automated calls from out of state, or even for 1-900 numbers. So even though enacting local legislation wouldn't solve the problem completely, it would be a welcome step in the right direction. Steve Baumgarten Davis Polk & Wardwell, New York, NY