SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the You-may-qualify-for-a-medical-grade-back-brace-paid-for-by-your-insurance dept.
Yesterday [March 26] the FTC (Federal Trade Comission) announced that it had won court orders shutting down four separate robocall "Operations Responsible for Billions of Illegal Robocalls"
Settlements were obtained against
NetDotSolutions
Higher Goals Marketing
Veterans of America
PointBreak Media
The judgements include multimillion dollar penalties and require the various entities to stop all robocalling and some other operations.
The calls you should see less of that these companies provided include
auto warranties, debt-relief services, home security systems, fake charities, and Google search results services
No indication if this includes those medical back brace insurance scam calls that seem to have taken over lately, but here is hoping.
More coverage here
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @03:28AM
For me, 2017 was a very bad year for spoofed robocalls. But 2018-2019 has not been too bad. Like multiple per day down to a couple each week. I guess it could have to do with who I gave the number to and a value decay.
(Score: 5, Informative) by captain normal on Friday March 29 2019, @03:35AM (8 children)
In the last 24 hours I've gotten 3 (three) spam calls on my phone. So seems FTC has a way to go. Pisses me off cause I know the TelCos could put a stop to this. They could easily block spoofed calls
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @03:41AM (5 children)
No, it is some sort of misguided regulation stopping them from doing that:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/robocallers-evolved-to-sidestep-new-call-blocking-rules-ags-tell-fcc/ [arstechnica.com]
If you think about it, it makes sense that is the case... I would easily pay more to allow 0 spoofed numbers to call me.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Friday March 29 2019, @05:07AM (3 children)
There's nothing stopping them from forcing the caller id to be correct or displaying "Fake Caller ID" instead of what the caller sent.
They don't seem to have a problem blocking calls that withhold caller ID at the would-be receiver's request, so they can treat spoofed caller id as withheld caller ID and if the reciever has freely elected to have that blocked, do so.
Simple fact, they don't because they don't want to.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @11:32AM (2 children)
Sorry, but you are just wrong. There is a regulation stopping them.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @12:10PM
Any laws preventing the complete elimination of robocalls (excluding those an individual has opted into, such as school notifications, etc) are because politicians use and abuse robocalls for fundraising. It is against a politician's self interest to stop robocalls.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday March 29 2019, @05:57PM
Nope. The service to block calls without caller ID are available right now.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Friday March 29 2019, @03:53PM
I wouldn't be surprised if the telcos were lobbying the FTC to put that rule in place. They make money on spoofed calls and would have to spend money to block them.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Friday March 29 2019, @01:07PM
Oh, but they will. If you buy their latest smartphone and buy their latest call blocking "app". It's all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$.
(Score: 2) by Farkus888 on Saturday March 30 2019, @02:40PM
There are tons of legitimate reasons to spoof phone numbers. Calling out from an 800 number is done by spoofing for example. People with on call services use it to call people back without disclosing their personal number. Not saying it can't be fixed, just that it is more complicated than ending blocked or spoofed numbers.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by redneckmother on Friday March 29 2019, @04:24AM
Ya think maybe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO0iG_P0P6M [youtube.com] had an influence?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @04:37AM (6 children)
Isn't this the FCC's domain?
(Score: 5, Informative) by number11 on Friday March 29 2019, @05:37AM (2 children)
Yes. And the FCC has fined them. $208M total. (Of that $208 million, the FCC has actually collected $6790. [boingboing.net]) The FCC says they don't have any way to actually collect.
The FCC predicts that nearly half of all calls in 2019 will be robocalls. It still has a way to go to catch up to the percentage of spam email, though.
(Score: 3, Funny) by SomeGuy on Friday March 29 2019, @01:02PM (1 child)
They could send it to one of those collection agencies that calls their number every five minutes until they pay up. :P
Or how about just cutting off their phone service until they pay up? Somehow ear shattering harassment won't result in that, but transmitting a Walt Disney movie will?!
(Score: 1) by anubi on Friday March 29 2019, @09:51PM
Nailing telespammers may well be in the domain of the FCC...
Maybe have the IRS collect it.
If the shell company won't pay, go after its stakeholders.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DannyB on Friday March 29 2019, @03:16PM (2 children)
This is the FCC's job.
But Pai's job is to prevent the FCC from doing its job.
The general pattern is to install heads of government agencies who will undermine that agency's regulatory mission.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday March 29 2019, @05:40PM (1 child)
Don't exaggerate.
Some people are put in place to make sure their agencies do the most comprehensive and painfully detailed investigation work possible.
On $other-party.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday March 29 2019, @06:31PM
I suppose that is true for agencies whose primary mission is to investigate and promote injustice.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @08:38AM
So, who ran these scams and who profited from them? And which politicians used these services?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by SomeGuy on Friday March 29 2019, @12:53PM (1 child)
A settlement? Really? A SETTLEMENT?
There should be no settlement for anything less than a televised public flogging of all individuals involved.
Why just yesterday I was getting the exact same GlaDOS sounding "Apple Support" robocaller EVERY FUCKING HALF HOUR.
There is NO excuse for this shit, it is not even just advertising or scamming, it is outright HARASSMENT.
Every single telespammer that calls you, the message you should really hear is "Hi, this is Rachel from Cardholder services, your lawmakers and the phone companies are corrupt jokes, and I'm going to keep calling you at all hours over and over again until the end of the universe BECAUSE I CAN!"
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday March 29 2019, @05:52PM
http://archives.sluggy.com/book.php?chapter=37#2003-10-14 [sluggy.com]
(3 strips of Pete obviously blowing some steam)