Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!netsys!vector!telecom-gateway From: bnelson@ccb.bbn.com (Barry C. Nelson) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Number privacy for fee? Message-ID: Date: 17 Mar 89 17:58:04 GMT Sender: news@vector.UUCP Lines: 14 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 96, message 8 of 9 After reading Bernie's input today I got the idea that there could be people out there who REALLY don't want to have their numbers displayed under any circumstances, and may be willing to pay for privacy services in areas where there was no masking (CLIR) option available. What sort of trouble would a company get into with the following scheme? Say they opened an inward WATS (1-800) service someplace and then (for a nominal fee) forwarded the calls of privacy seekers to their intended destinations, whereupon THEIR outWATS number would be displayed, giving the recipient no info as to the caller (except that privacy was precious). (This is purely an academic question, of course.) Barry