Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!iuvax!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil (Will Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: MCI Playing "Switcheroo"
Message-ID: <3583@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 7 Feb 90 16:21:30 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 27
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 80, message 2 of 10


>Moderator's Note: But the point is, you did make the call, so you
>have to pay *someone*. To not pay at all based on your line of
>reasoning would be an unjust enrichment for yourself.

What about equating an unauthorized carrier-initiated switching of
your default LD carrier with the long-established legal rules
regarding unordered merchandise? If someone sends you unordered goods
and then tries to bill you for them, you not only have no obligation
to pay for them, but you have a perfect legal right to keep them. If
they want the goods back, the sender has to bear all the costs and
effort of getting them back.

If MCI causes the telco to switch your default carrier to their firm
WITHOUT YOUR AUTHORIZING IT, they are giving you a *gift* of their LD
service! You don't owe them a cent, and have no obligation to pay for
this *unordered service*. You can make all the LD calls you want for
free, until they have the sense to terminate your LD service and stop
throwing their resources away.

As soon as a legal ruling in a couple jurisdictions established this
principle, we'd see those LD companies being *very* careful about
getting written authorization that will hold up in court as legal
documents before doing any carrier-switching!


Regards, Will