Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!netsys!vector!telecom-gateway From: prindle@NADC.ARPA (Frank Prindle) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Calling party ID Message-ID: Date: 12 Mar 89 01:09:27 GMT Sender: news@vector.UUCP Lines: 30 Approved: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 86, message 3 of 4 A strange twist of (legal) fate has caused Bell of PA to temporarily suspend offering Calling Party ID service here in the Philadelphia area. It seems that there are two reasons: 1. There is apparently a state law on the books which makes tracing a phone call illegal unless ordered by a law enforcement agency. Thus, Calling Party ID is being considered as a violation of state law! 2. Consumer advocate groups are protesting introduction of this service based on "invasion of privacy" to the caller. Curiously, Bell is pushing the service as one which protects the privacy of the callee. At issue here are situations where, for example, a battered wife tries to contact her children from a shelter, but for obvious reasons doesn't want the shelter's phone number (and thus her whereabouts) flashed up on the phone when it rings. It has been suggested that Bell provide a means for the caller to withold identification by dialing a special code, but Bell contends that this would render the service useless, since any bothersome caller could do the same thing to "protect" his (dubious) privacy. So Bell of PA has postponed introduction of this service for several weeks while the legal eagles come up with a solution. I don't suspect much will come of it - even "Baby Bells" still have plenty of corporate clout. Also, the service has been in operation in NJ for 6 months or more and there have been no major problems. Sincerely, Frank Prindle Prindle@NADC.arpa