TELECOM Digest     Fri, 1 Jul 2005 23:25:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 305

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    From our Archives: 19th Century Telegraphers (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Policy Post 11.16: Open CRS Web Site Shows Great Demand (Monty Solomon)
    Policy Post 11.17: Supreme Court Rules Grokster Liable (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.19: EFF Publishes Legal Guide for Bloggers (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.20: EFF Supporters Slam Congress to Stop (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.21: Supreme Court Ruling Will Chill Technology (M Solomon)
    PFIR Statement on Adult Content Regulations; Broader Impacts (M Solomon)
    Re: Cellular Jamming?  Think Again. (mc)
    Question About Annoying Phone Calls; Please Any Info (Xxjessi77xx@aol)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri,  1 Jul 2005 22:14:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: From Our Archives; 19th Century Telegraphers


For your reading this holiday weekend, a book review first published
here in this Digest in October, 1992, presented by Jim Haynes, dealing
with 19th century telegraphers.


  Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:11:49 -0500
  From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
  Message-Id: <199210150511.AA11371@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
  To: ptownson@gaak.LCS.MIT.EDU
  Subject: 19th Century Telegraphers (Book Review)
  Status: R

  Date: Thu, 15 Oct 00:10:00 GMT
  Reply-To: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
  Organization: TELECOM Digest

I received this interesting book review in my mail today and thought
it worthwhile sharing with TELECOM Digest readers.

PAT

  From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes)
  Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 18:20:09 -0700
  Subject: 19th Century Telegraphers (Book Review)

Book Review

     The American Telegrapher: a social history 1860-1900
     Edwin Gabler
     Rutgers University Press, 1988
     ISBN 0-8135-1284-0 (hardbound), 0-8135-1285-9 (paperback)

I seem to read a lot of books which are at the same time both
interesting and tedious.  This is one such book.  Written by an
academic historian for reading by other academic historians, it is
long on footnotes, theories, and statistics and short on
flesh-and-blood storytelling; yet there is enough of the latter to
entertain the casual reader.  Part I of this review is an attempt to
convey the general message of the book.  Part II is for fun: a
selection of stories about the lives and times telegraphers a century
ago.

	Part I

There are five chapters: a history of the Great Strike of 1883 as an
introduction to the world of the operators; a description of the
telegraph industry and especially Western Union; a social portrait of
the telegraphers; a study of women telegraphers; and a summary of the
labor movement and politics of telegraphers.  An epilogue compares the
situation of telegraphers in the 1880s with that of the air traffic
controllers a hundred years later.

Telegraph and railroad companies following the Civil War represented
an entirely new kind of business, one in which the company's assets
are strung out for hundreds or thousands of miles with offices and
employees sprinkled along the lines.  There were other affinities
between the two kinds of companies.  Railroads used telegraphy to
support their own operations.  Railroad rights-of-way were ideal
places to run telegraph lines, affording easy access for construction
and maintenance at a time when there were few roads.  Telegraph
business was likely to be found in the same places the railroads
served.  In many small towns the railroad station served as the public
telegraph office, as there was not enough telegraph business to
support an office for telegraph alone.  Some railroads such as B & O
operated their own public telegraph businesses.  (cf. Southern Pacific
a century later getting into the communications business.)  Other
railroads had contract arrangements with the telegraph companies,
principally Western Union, for use of rights of way, interconnection
of circuits, and providing public telegraph service at the railroad
stations.

These new kinds of businesses needed a new kind of management.  The
military became their model.  Many of the top managers were alumni of
the Civil War military telegraph system.  The companies had divisions,
rule books, general orders and special orders, and chains of command.
Management style was authoritarian.  As is the case with some
companies today, the telegraph and railroad companies then were headed
by a mixture of people who knew the business and those who were
primarily financial wizards.

Telegraph operators represented the beginning of a new social class,
the lower-middle-class white-collar employees of large corporations.
Many were the children of farmers or of city blue-collar workers.  A
great many were of Irish lineage.  For all of these telegraphy offered
a step up the social ladder as well as an escape from hard physical
labor and city slums or rural isolation.  Telegraphy was an occupation
open to women, although the majority of operators were male (and, like
the women, young and unmarried).

The national economy was fairly flat or even deflationary during the
period 1860-1890.  Western Union profits rose handsomely throughout
the period.  The operators did not share in this prosperity.  For one
thing, there was an oversupply of them.  First-class operators, who
could send and receive thirty to forty words per minute for hours on
end, were assigned to press and market reporting circuits.  They could
command pay two to three times as great as that of the second-class
operators who made up the bulk of the force.  Many operators learned
the craft by hanging around small railroad and telegraph offices;
others worked their way up from messenger and clerk jobs in larger
offices; still others were trained at a number of schools that sprang
up around the country.  Most of the latter seem to have been
disreputable if not completely fraudulent, operating for profit and
promising high pay and mobility to rural youth.  They were the
century-ago counterparts of the for-profit data processing schools of
our own times, the kind that advertised on matchbook covers and turned
out an oversupply of under-qualified graduates for high tuition fees.

Another financial problem for the telegraphers resulted from their new
social class.  Telegraphers' pay was on a par with that of skilled
blue-collar workers; but their living expenses were greater.  With the
move to suits and ties and shined shoes they felt a need to live in
middle-class housing, eat middle-class meals, and partake of
middle-class entertainments.

A few of the operators' perceptions of mistreatment by the companies
were more apparent than real.  The 1840s through 1860s had been a
period when telegraphy was just getting started.  Job opportunities
were abundant and promotions were rapid.  As the industry matured
there were fewer spectacular success stories; telegraphy even seemed
to be a dead-end job.  Other complaints had a more solid foundation.
Mergers of telegraph companies eliminated jobs.  An economic downturn
in the 1870s caused Western Union to institute across-the-board salary
reductions, which were partially offset by monetary deflation.
Operators tended to move around a lot, which allowed the company to
hire cheaper replacements for those who left.

The first attempt of telegraph workers to organize was the National
Telegraphic Union of 1863.  This was more of a mutual benefit society
than a labor union.  It provided members with sickness and funeral
benefits and aimed to elevate the character of the members and promote
just and harmonious relations with employers.  With conditions for
telegraphers growing worse after the Civil War the Telegraphers'
Protective League was formed in 1868 as a very different kind of
organization.  It was a secret organization, because there was nothing
at the time to protect its members from the unbridled power of their
employers.  Rather than relieving the sick and burying the dead it
proposed to raise the members to a financial position in which they
could take care of themselves.

The TPL felt strong enough by January, 1870 to risk a strike against
Western Union.  It failed after about a week.  There were just too
many operators seeking work, especially in the winter season; the
company was too strong; and the union was too poorly organized.  The
operators' situation continued to deteriorate through the 1870s as
Western Union reduced wages, the number of would-be operators
increased, and the company absorbed its competitors.  An attempt to
form another union in 1872 fizzled.  In 1881 Jay Gould took over
Western Union, moving the company closer to being a true national
monopoly.  By the summer of 1882 a number of regional labor
organizations put aside their differences to form the Brotherhood of
Telegraphers of the United States and Canada under the aegis of the
Knights of Labor.  The Brotherhood, unlike its predecessors, accepted
the female operators as members.

In July, 1883 the Brotherhood presented a list of grievances to
Western Union and some other firms, hoping for at least a compromise
settlement and at worst a short strike.  When the company made no
meaningful concessions the telegraphers walked out on July 19.  At
first things looked good for the Brotherhood.  About three fourths of
Western Union operators honored the strike.  Public opinion was much
on the side of the telegraphers, at least to the extent that it was
against the side of Jay Gould and the W.U. monopoly.  One competing
telegraph company settled quickly with the union; and another (B & O)
came close to, but never close enough.  Union leaders worked hard to
keep the public on their side, urging the strikers to be models of
dignity and sobriety.  The women were as valiant as the men, if not
more so, in upholding the strike.

Still, public sympathy did not feed the hungry; and the strike
dwindled until it was officially called off August 17.  Operators
wishing to return to work had to sign a pledge of loyalty; those
considered militant unionists were blacklisted by the company.  Still,
it appears the company was somewhat humbled by the power of the union
and made a few concessions to the operators.  Failure of the strike
led to some ill feeling in the larger labor movement.  The
telegraphers accused the Knights of insufficient support; the Knights
leadership felt the telegraphers had acted impulsively and without
sufficient preparation.  The Brotherhood soon withdrew from the
Knights; and union activity reverted to local groups.  Yet by 1885
there was a new organization, the Telegraphers' Union of America,
which rejoined the Knights in 1886.  This seems to have faded away by
the early 1890s along with the Knights.  Railroad telegraphers formed
the Order of Railway Telegraphers in 1886.  An Order of Commercial
Telegraphers was formed in 1890 but never amounted to much, and allied
itself with the railway telegraphers in 1897-98.  The next attempt to
form a union didn't happen until 1907, with the Commercial
Telegraphers' Union of America, which also suffered disaster in a
strike against Western Union.

Gabler concludes with a discussion of a number of labor and political
issues affecting telegraphers.  One of the Brotherhood's demands had
been equal pay for equal work, male and female.  This seems to have
been widely hailed as the Right Thing to do.  I wonder whether the
male telegraphers supported the demand because it was right; or if
they supported it because they knew if the companies had to pay men
and women the same they would hire only men.

Some wanted a craft union, with membership limited to telegraphers,
with an apprenticeship program that would raise the quality of
operators while reducing their numbers.  There was some interest in
government licensing of operators.  Others favored an industrial
union, open to all Western Union employees.  Some objected to the
secret fraternal rites that were a feature of the Knights of Labor;
Catholic workers were forbidden to become members of secret
organizations of any kind.  The operators wanted to protect their new
middle-class image by being models of respectability and sobriety;
some of the linemen on the other hand had no scruples about cutting
wires to increase pressure on the companies during a strike.  Some
felt that telegraphy should be a government monopoly, as was and still
is the norm in Europe.  Some saw salvation in a worker-owned
cooperative, if they could only convince the banks or the government
to put up the money necessary to establish the system.  Others sought
to improve the status of the working classes through political action;
quite a number were attracted to the United Labor Party of Henry
George.  A hundred years later issues like these are still with us.

	Part II

Dr. Gabler had access to a vast amount of material: census records,
archives of the telegraph companies, contemporary newspaper accounts,
magazines published for the edification and amusement of operators,
and even novels in which telegraphers were used as characters.  The
footnotes and bibliography take up 48 pages.  One page in the book is
an illustration of advertisements in a telegraphers' magazine of 1883.
They include a book on shorthand, a book of money-making secrets, a
book on the mysteries of love-making, a book on fortune telling, watch
charms with microscopic pictures, a book of advice to the unmarried, a
package of stationery, a book on politeness, a book of letters for all
occasions, playing cards with marked backs, a book of magic tricks, a
book on business, and a book on ballroom dancing.  The theme is that
these appealed to working-class young adults who felt a need to learn
how to behave properly as members of the middle-class.

A number of telegraph operators rose to prominence.  Thomas Edison and
Andrew Carnegie are the best known; Theodore N. Vail was a founder of
AT&T; others found success in business or politics; and almost all the
upper management of Western Union was drawn from the ranks of
operators.  In 1885 there were five doctors and one dentist
moonlighting as telegraph operators -- maybe medicine and dentistry
didn't pay all that well in those days.

Thomas Edison, as a young telegrapher in the 1860s, would work a full
day and then stay in the office at night, listening to a press circuit
to get high speed code practice.  Later he worked the Boston end of a
New York circuit with an operator named Jerry Borst.  Operators formed
friendships with their counterparts at the other end of the wires.
The telegraph companies insisted that operators should work at
whatever circuits they were assigned.  Edison and Borst conspired to
change three characters of the code, so that nobody else could copy
their transmissions and they could always work together.  Cockroaches
were such a problem in the office that Edison devised a bug zapper to
protect his lunch from the little beasties.

Friendships over the wires were nourished during lulls in traffic by
exchanges of jokes and local news, and by checker games.  Sometimes
love and courtship blossomed too.  At other times operators were rude
to one another.  On one occasion two operators got so angry at each
other that they arranged to meet at a town halfway between their posts
and settle the matter with fists at 1:00 AM.  "Salting" (sending too
fast for the receiving operator) was a frequent source of irritation.
Salting was also part of the common practice of hazing new operators.

Operators frequently got privileges, such as free passes to theaters
and on trains.  With the chronic oversupply it was common for
operators to travel back and forth across the country looking for
work, or for better conditions.  Operators didn't get vacations, paid
or otherwise; but in the summer months telegraph offices would open in
the resort towns where the rich took their vacations, and operators
could find work there.

In 1883 Western Union employed 444 telegraphers in New York City, 96
in Boston, 88 in St. Louis, and 83 in Chicago.  This seems to support
a conjecture of mine that W.U. was weakened all its life by
overattention to serving New York City and insufficient effort to
develop the business in other parts of the country.

There was friction between the city operators and the rural operators.
The city operators were proud of their skills, and wanted to move the
traffic.  They resented they way country operators would frequently
interrupt transmissions.  The country operators, usually working in
railroad depots, countered that telegraphy was but a small part of
their duties.  They had to answer questions from the public, sell
tickets, meet trains, tend switches and signals, handle freight, and
keep the lamps burning.  They commonly worked shifts as long as twelve
or even sixteen hours.

Development of duplex and then quadruplex operation greatly increased
the pressure on operators, as the receiving operators could not
interrupt the senders.  Gender stereotyping held that only male
operators had the stamina to handle these heavily-loaded circuits; yet
the book cites a number of examples of women who worked these
circuits.  Women were consistently paid less than men.  The companies
were well aware that women were a bargain compared with men, and
continually tried to replace men with women.

Nellie Welch had full charge of the telegraph office in Point Arena,
California in 1886.  She was eleven years old.

Western Union and the Cooper Union Institute in 1869 jointly started a
free eight-month telegraphy course for women.  It lasted through the
early 1890s, turning out about 80 graduates a year.  They would first
take non-paying jobs assisting regular operators, and then be hired as
operators on lightly loaded city circuits.  This school was much
despised by men for its contribution to the oversupply problem,
thought it probably hurt the opportunities for women more than those
for men.

Beginner and less-skilled operators were called "plugs" or "hams."
(Note the endless controversy over the origin of the term "ham" for
amateur radio operators.)  The schools that turned out these operators
were called "plug factories."

Craft magazines sought to shame operators who taught telegraphy.  They
were urged to pass on the secrets of Morse only to brothers, sisters,
sons, and daughters.  At least one railroad operator quit his job
rather than cooperate with a student placed with him by the company.

                        ----------------

[Moderator's Note: My thanks for this very interesting article.
Digest readers are encouraged to send book reviews and other special
articles like this to Telecom for distribution on the net.   PAT]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: (in 2005) Another article about Nellie
Welch (the 11 year old in 1886 who operated the telegraph office) told
of how she was _very quick_ at sending and recieving messages; how in
her 'spare time' she also wrote and sold stage coach tickets and
tended to the horses. That particular combination telegraph office/
stage coach 'way station' was also a place where the stage coach
drivers would exchange their horses for a fresh team of horses to 
continue their journey. Nellie would unhitch the team of horses,
take them in the stable to be fed, watered and 'bedded down' until
the animals started their trip back to where they came from the next
day. Then she would take a fresh team out, hook them to the stage
coach. That was also a change place for the stage coach drivers,
who sometimes stayed there overnight while some other driver took the
stage coach on to wherever. Assisted by her mother and her invalid
father, she was the principal 'bread winner' in the little family. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:41:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Policy Post 11.16: Open CRS Web Site Shows Great Demand


CDT POLICY POST Volume 11, Number 16, June 30, 2005

A BRIEFING ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AFFECTING CIVIL LIBERTIES ONLINE
from THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY

CONTENTS:

(1)  Open CRS Web Site Shows Great Demand for Congressional Reports
(2)  Background on Access to Congressional Research Service Reports
(3)  Legislative Efforts on Access to CRS Reports
(4)  Next Steps for Open CRS

http://www.cdt.org/publications/policyposts/11/17

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:41:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Policy Post 11.17: Supreme Court Rules Grokster can be Liable


CDT POLICY POST Volume 11, Number 17, July 1, 2005

A BRIEFING ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AFFECTING CIVIL LIBERTIES ONLINE
from THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY

CONTENTS:
(1) Supreme Court Rules Grokster can be Held Liable For Inducing 
    Infringement
(2) Lower Court Rulings on Grokster Remain Crucial
(3) Congressional Implications and the Overall Digital Copyright Debate

http://www.cdt.org/publications/policyposts/11/17

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:41:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.19: EFF Publishes Legal Guide for Bloggers


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 19  June 16, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 335th Issue of EFFector:

 * EFF Publishes Legal Guide for Bloggers
 * BayFF on Bloggers' Rights, July 19
 * Why Isn't Secure Flight Grounded?  
 * Popcorn and Free Speech: EFF Co-Presents "The 
   Front," July 24 and August 2
 * EFF Offers Security Training for Organizers, June 29
 * EFF Seeks Experienced, Dynamic Membership Coordinator 
 * MiniLinks (11): How I Became the Subject of a Secret
   Service Investigation 
 * Administrivia


http://www.eff.org/effector/18/19.php 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:41:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.20: EFF Supporters Slam Congress to Stop the


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 20  June 22, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 336th Issue of EFFector:

 * Action Update: EFF Supporters Slam Congress to Stop the 
   Broadcast Flag
 * Internet Entrepreneur Joe Kraus Joins EFF Board
 * Upholding the Legality of Reverse Engineering:
   Judges Weigh Issues in Eighth Circuit Videogame Case
 * EFF Joins Battle to Protect the Right to Read Anonymously,
   Publishers' Rights
 * EFF Seeks Experienced, Dynamic Membership Coordinator 
 * MiniLinks (12): Software Patents, J'Accuse!
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/20.php 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:41:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.21: Supreme Court Ruling Will Chill Technology


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 21  June 27, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 337th Issue of EFFector:

 * Supreme Court Ruling Will Chill Technology Innovation
 * A Reader's Guide to the Grokster Ruling
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/21.php 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:47:17 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: PFIR Statement on Adult Content Regulations and Broader Impacts


PFIR Statement on Adult Content Regulations and Broader Impacts

http://www.pfir.org/statements/adult-content-regulations 

July 1, 2005		   

 
The U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) has promulgated and is about to
begin enforcing a set of regulations known as "18 U.S.C. 2257" which
relate to record-keeping requirements for a broad range of "adult
content" in virtually all media, including print, video, film, Web
sites, etc.

Summary, detail, and other data regarding these regulations are
viewable at:

   http://my.execpc.com/~xxxlaw/2257Tables5.24.05.htm   ("Technical" View)

and:

   http://www.openmindmedia.com/records/   ("Layman's" View)

While the ostensible intent of 2257 is the laudable goal of protecting
minors from abuse and exploitation, it appears that the regulations'
very wide scope will have a chilling effect on all U.S.  entities who
deal in even peripherally-related materials that are viewed as
objectionable under "lowest-common-denominator" definitions.
Presumably this very wide impact is viewed as a positive attribute of
the regulations by their framers.

However, this is a matter that goes far beyond the limited confines of
adult entertainment.  Regardless of how one feels about pornography or
adult-oriented content in general, the precedent set by these
regulations should set off alarm bells for everyone who "publishes"
*any* sort of materials -- however exotic or mundane they might be in
any form of media, including virtually all Web site operators.

The use of administrative regulatory frameworks in this manner to
"control" otherwise legal materials has set the stage for the
application of the same reasoning to entities who aren't such easy
targets as adult content producers.  Will well-heeled copyright
interests now insist that regulations be drafted requiring that all
U.S. Web sites -- containing any form of content -- maintain detailed
records of permission to display *every* article, graphic, and photo,
to proactively ensure no possible violation of copyright or other
intellectual property rights?

If such rules work against adult content sites, the temptation to
apply similar reasoning and techniques much more comprehensively will
be very intense indeed.  While such an approach might appear logical
from the standpoint of protecting intellectual property, the effects
would likely be devastating for the interchange of information and
legally-protected speech.

The presence of complex record-keeping requirements can easily
discourage the publication or display of completely legal and
non-infringing materials by many (especially smaller) entities, simply
because the burden of compliance will be too great and the risks of
error too onerous.  Such a deleterious effect would dramatically skew
the balance toward what amounts to an assumption of wrongdoing, which
is essentially contrary to American traditions of free speech rights.

At the very least, such dramatic shifts should only be the result of
full, detailed, and open legislative processes, not the spawn of
regulatory fiat.

Today the regulations relate to adult content.  But the pattern set by
18 U.S.C. 2257 could soon affect the speech rights of us all, even if
watching old reruns of "I Love Lucy" is the closest many of us
routinely get to adult entertainments.


 --Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@pfir.org or lauren@vortex.com or lauren@eepi.org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR 
  - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, EEPI 
  - Electronic Entertainment Policy Initiative - http://www.eepi.org
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
DayThink: http://daythink.vortex.com

------------------------------

From: mc <mc_no_spam@uga.edu>
Subject: Re: Cellular Jamming?  Think Again.
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 18:45:02 -0400
Organization: Speed Factory http://www.speedfactory.net


> Of course they say that.  And every once in a while they dust off
> their announcement that broadcasting more than 5 watts on a CB radio
> is illegal and subjects the operator to fines and seizure of their
> equipment too.  But they don't actually do it.  They're stretched thin
> already trying to figure out where telecommunications is going so they
> can stay a little ahead of it, and they just don't bother with
> "crimes" that do not involve substantial amounts of money.

You haven't been reading the news on www.arrl.org, have you?

------------------------------

From: Xxjessi77xx@aol.com
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:25:07 EDT
Subject: Question About Annoying Phone Calls - Please, any Info


Hi, lately for the last few days I've been getting calls from this
number: 215-320-0424 I looked up the number online and it brought me
to your web site where it said and it gave the number that had been
calling me -- (Academy Services Nuisance Calls 215-320-0424)-- I was
wondering if you can give me any info about this number or the person
calling me? Should I have my company block this number from calling me
or what? Please let me know anything. Thanks.

-Jessica



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We had someone else a few weeks ago
complain about that number. Your recourse might be to subscribe to
a telco service to block numbers from unwanted calls. (You may already
have it on your line). You dial *60 (or 60# in some places) then 
follow the recorded prompts you are given. You'll be allowed to dial 
in the number to be blocked, or dial #01 to block the last call
received, even if you do not know who it was. I have been getting
calls from 310-566-1083 which always blocks the name of the caller,
but dialing it reaches something called 'Girls Gone Wild'. I also 
have *77 service, which blocks people who deliberatly do *67 to
hide themselves. When I just now tried your 215-320-0424 I got some
mysterious message that I had reached 'Academy Services' and to 
enter the desired extension number, or 'hold for an operator'. I
decided to hold, it started ringing again and another recording came
on telling me I had reached 'extension 5067' and to leave my name
and _phone number_ so my call could be immediatly returned. It smelled
like some collection agency to me; I gave 'it' (the recorded message
when I was requested to speak) my usual salutation under those
circumstances (a loud, rather offensive belch) and disconnected. Of 
course _I_ did *67 first before the dialing string. Since my latest
call from 310-566-1083 arrived at a most inopportune moment (I was
seated in my bathroom and came rushing to the phone only to hear 
the silence) I've decided to add that number to my own repretoire
of unwanted callers. I hope this helps you a little.   PAT]  

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308
    and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #305
******************************