31 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981 Add this Digest to your personal   or   The Telecom Digest for January 26, 2013 Volume 32 : Issue 23 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Verizon Communications Posts .2 Billion Loss After One-Off Costs (Bill Horne) Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List" (Bill Horne) Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List" (Pete Cresswell) Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List" (Matt Simpson) Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List" (danny burstein) Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List" (Barry Margolin) Re: Exposure of files on unsecured wireless no excuse to search, judge rules (fatkinson.remove-this) ====== 31 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne 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 that person, or email address owner. Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. 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, and other stuff of interest.

Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:26:31 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Verizon Communications Posts .2 Billion Loss After One-Off Costs  
Message-ID: <20130125162631.GA19227@telecom.csail.mit.edu>

Verizon Communications Posts $4.2 Billion Loss After One-Off Costs

USA based Verizon Communications has reported that its fourth-quarter
revenues rose by 5.7% to reach US$30.05 billion. However, the company
posted a net loss of US$4.23 billion compared to a loss of US$2 billion 
a year ago - thanks largely to the recently announced pensions provision.

http://www.cellular-news.com/story/58241.php

-- 
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)



Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:33:42 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List"  
Message-ID: <20130125163342.GA20190@telecom.csail.mit.edu>

Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List"

By Jerrod Nielsen
CREATED JAN. 24, 2013

A [Idaho] House committee has agreed to debate a bill to lift the ban
placed on the ability of telephone companies to make customer cold
calls.

The House State Affairs Committee introduced the bill Thursday and
sent it to the Business Committee for review.

The bill is being pushed by Minnesota-based Frontier Communications
and Louisiana-based CenturyLink Inc. The companies say a 2000 law to
end cold calls to customers and create a "Do Not Call" list hampers
their ability to market new services to new customers.

http://www.kivitv.com/news/local/188310211.html

-- 
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)



Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 14:42:20 -0500
From: Pete Cresswell <PeteCress@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call  List" 
Message-ID: <inn5g85enku0j9k9l6k5a80r868p13uub9@4ax.com>

Per Bill Horne:
>The bill is being pushed by Minnesota-based Frontier Communications
>and Louisiana-based CenturyLink Inc. The companies say a 2000 law to
>end cold calls to customers and create a "Do Not Call" list hampers
>their ability to market new services to new customers.

Hampers?   Sounds like I don't fully understand the current state
of affairs.

My Understanding:

The Do-Not-Call lists are effective dead because the perpetrators
have:

   - Moved offshore

   - Use VOIP, sometimes with multiple skips (whatever 
     that is...)

I have a small folder full of lame-ass letters from the
Pennsylvania Attorney General's office in response to the
complaints I've registered - before I gave up.

Essentially they cite the items above and add that it's too much
trouble to prosecute.

Personally, I'm waiting for a standalone (does not require a PC)
challenge-response scheme that a non-technical person like myself
can implement.
-- 
Pete Cresswell



Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:18:44 -0500
From: Matt Simpson <net-news69@jmatt.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call  List" 
Message-ID: <net-news69-772D31.12184325012013@news.eternal-september.org>

In article <20130125163342.GA20190@telecom.csail.mit.edu>,
 Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> wrote:

> 
>
> http://www.kivitv.com/news/local/188310211.html
> 

>From the article:

" Lobbyist and former Idaho Rep. Jim Clark says the bill gives customers 
the ability to opt-out from solicitation calls."

So maybe they could make a list of all the customers who opt-out.  And 
they could provide the list to telemarketers and say "Do not call these 
people".  Maybe they could call it a "Do not call list".    But there 
must be some catch that makes it less effective than the existing law, 
or the lobbyists wouldn't be pushing it.



Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:10:42 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call  List" 
Message-ID: <kdusci$ni4$1@reader1.panix.com>

In <20130125163342.GA20190@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> writes:

>Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List"

>By Jerrod Nielsen
>CREATED JAN. 24, 2013

>A [Idaho] House committee has agreed to debate a bill to lift the ban
>placed on the ability of telephone companies to make customer cold
>calls.

>The House State Affairs Committee introduced the bill Thursday and
>sent it to the Business Committee for review.

>The bill is being pushed by Minnesota-based Frontier Communications
>and Louisiana-based CenturyLink Inc. The companies say a 2000 law to
>end cold calls to customers and create a "Do Not Call" list hampers
>their ability to market new services to new customers.

>
>http://www.kivitv.com/news/local/188310211.html
>

This sounds suspiciously like the sort of stuff ALEC [a], that
Big Business Lobbyist Coalition, would be pushing. If so, expect
near identical bills to be introduced in 49 other states
and the District of Columbia in the next couple of weeks.

[a]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_Council
[

-- 
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
                    dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]



Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:59:07 -0500
From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call  List" 
Message-ID: <barmar-E480B5.16590725012013@news.eternal-september.org>

In article <20130125163342.GA20190@telecom.csail.mit.edu>,
 Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> wrote:

> Idaho lawmakers look at throwing away the "Do Not Call List"
> 
> By Jerrod Nielsen
> CREATED JAN. 24, 2013
> 
> A [Idaho] House committee has agreed to debate a bill to lift the ban
> placed on the ability of telephone companies to make customer cold
> calls.

So is this proposal throwing away the DNC list entirely, or just 
exempting telephone companies from it?

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***



Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:02:20 -0700
From: fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re:  Exposure of files on unsecured wireless no  excuse to search,  judge rules
Message-ID: <1c6ff8753ec4a5874cb135c333f1d3d2.squirrel@webmail.mishmash.org>

> Exposure of files on unsecured wireless no excuse to search, judge rules
> Warrantless search of file violated defendant's Fourth Amendment
> right, federal judge says in child porn case
>
> By Jaikumar Vijayan
> January 23, 2013

     It is very sad that they upheld his fourth amendment rights while TSA
violates them daily.

     While I agree with the ruling (and I still have contempt for the
perp), we should all be protected from unreasonable search and
seizure.  That's what the fourth amendment is all about.

                                              Fred





TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition 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 Bill Horne. 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.

The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.

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


Copyright (C) 2013 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.


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.