Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!killer!vector!telecom-gateway From: ms6b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Calling Party ID Suspension Message-ID: Date: 13 Mar 89 19:53:06 GMT Sender: news@vector.UUCP Lines: 35 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 87, message 1 of 7 I can't let the moderator's flaming regarding caller ID go unanswered. If I knock on your door and refuse to identify myself, you don't have to let me in. If I refuse to identify msyelf to your secretary over the phone, you don't have to take the call. The problem is not with caller ID per se, but with making it compulsory. I see nothing wrong with providing callers the option to disable automatic forwarding of caller ID to callee. If I am a drug prevention hot line, I will choose to accept all calls whether or not the caller has disabled forwarding of his/her ID. On my home phone, I will probably choose not to answer or let my answering machine pick up, if caller ID has been diabled by the caller. It is technically not very difficult to allow for disabling of caller ID. In California where some 20+% of all lines are unlisted, Pactel has responded to the marketplace and indicated that it will allow callers to disable caller ID either on a per call basis, or by presubscription. However, anyone who does that will have to take the risk that I won't answer their call. As we enter the ISDN age it will be a trivial matter for me to program my phone so it doesn't even ring if the caller has suppressed caller-ID. However, if the monopoly local network reveals my number, even over my objection, I have no choice but to give up using the phone -- a rather high price to pay, I would argue. The economic theory of legal property rights argues that rights should be allocated in such a way as to minimize the total social burden associated with exercising and protecting these rights. It makes far more sense to put the burden on the callee to refuse to answer if the caller chooses to remain unidentified. Marvin Sirbu Carnegie Mellon University internet: ms6b+@andrew.cmu.edu bitnet: ms6b+%andrew@CMCCVB