Path: utzoo!telecom-request
Date: 17 May 91 02:12:47 GMT
From: Robert J Woodhead <kddlab!lkbreth.foretune.co.jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 50k Counts of Wire Fraud
Message-ID: <telecom11.366.2@eecs.nwu.edu>
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.  Tokyo Japan
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 366, Message 2 of 11
Lines: 32

bluemoon!sbrack@cis.ohio-state.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> The "victim" acted of his own accord, and got what he
> requested from the telco.  No one represented the call to be anything
> other than what irt was.  If he or she needed more information about
> the charges attached to the number he or she was dialijng, the
> information was only a DTMF away.  I wasn't "blaming" anyone who
> didn't voluntarily contract for a service offered them, "dammit."

I'm getting a little annoyed at your sophilism, sir.  Let ME give you
an example.  I set up a little shop.  Outside the shop, I place a sign
that says "Please come in."  If you think to ask, I will tell you that
when you do so, you will be automatically charged a $50 cover charge.
Otherwise, as soon as you put one step in the door, bingo, $50,
whether you like it or not.

Now, do you really think that is fair?  Quite frankly, if you do,
then you've got your head in the sand.  More likely you'd be
screaming for the cops!

And what about the poor schmuck who misdials the number by accident?

The solution, as has been mentioned before, is a description of
charges and a grace period.

And with that, I will say no more (probably to the relief of everyone,
our esteemed Moderator most of all!)


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.   trebor@foretune.co.jp