|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 263 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Re: Guess What Texting Costs Your Wireless Provider?
Re: Guess What Texting Costs Your Wireless Provider?
Re: What could/would cause a SIM card to belly-up?
Re: What could/would cause a SIM card to belly-up?
Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which students are gay, raising new questions about online privacy
====== 28 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 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, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "www.Queensbridge.us" <NOTvalid@Queensbridge.us>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Message-ID: <2521703f-2203-44ce-b4dd-ac6605040e9c@k26g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>
On Sep 15, 10:50 am, ed <bern...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> Quoting telecom-ow...@telecom-digest.org:
>
>
>
> > Message Digest
> > Volume 28 : Issue 254 : "text" Format
> > Sam Spade wrote:
>
> > > Isn't this a case where prudent planning can go a long way? I'm
> > > thinking in terms of calling customer service before I leave home, and
> > > going over my travel plans with them. Perhaps getting a supervisor's
> > > name if there is any hint of a run around? They are the folks who
> > > finally do the billing.
>
> > > ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> > > Please write up a report of your experiences and submit it here: I'm
> > > very interested in seeing how you're received when you make that
> > > request.
>
> > If you are in a state where to do so is legal, I'd suggest recording
> > the call, so you'll have irrefutable proof of what they told you.
>
> > Dave
>
> If you call a company that plays an automated attendant message
> like, "For training and quality control, this call may be recorded",
> does that constitute consent to record the call?
>
> They don't say, "*we* may record this call" or "you may not record
> this call", they say "this call may be recorded." Sounds like
> clear consent to me! After all, the reason I want to record my
> conversations with any company is to ensure quality control--i.e.,
> that they keep their word.
>
> Does anyone on this list know if this legal argument ever been used
> in any state or federal court?
I think that "may" denotes permission so that I can record at my end
to help me review my telephone etiquette. Also permission for them if
you continue with call, and that "can" denotes possibility. "May be"
could also denote possibility.
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:09:38 -0400
From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Message-ID: <barmar-BD36C2.15093823092009@news.eternal-september.org>
In article
<2521703f-2203-44ce-b4dd-ac6605040e9c@k26g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
"www.Queensbridge.us" <NOTvalid@Queensbridge.us> wrote:
> I think that "may" denotes permission so that I can record at my end
> to help me review my telephone etiquette. Also permission for them if
> you continue with call, and that "can" denotes possibility. "May be"
> could also denote possibility.
The full sentence is usually "This call may be monitored or recorded for
quality or training purposes." They're clearly describing what THEY
might do, not granting YOU permission. And even if you do interpret it
as granting permission, it's only granted for certain purposes; you can
record it for quality or training purposes (who would the customer be
training?), not necessarily to preserve evidence for a potential
lawsuit. I suppose you might be able to make the case that reporting
them to the BBB would be a quality issue.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Message-ID: <ac371523-b8d8-4acc-b66f-7ecebd241d2e@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
On Sep 23, 2:57 pm, "www.Queensbridge.us" <NOTva...@Queensbridge.us>
wrote:
> > Does anyone on this list know if this legal argument ever been used
> > in any state or federal court?
>
> I think that "may" denotes permission so that I can record at my end
> to help me review my telephone etiquette. Also permission for them if
> you continue with call, and that "can" denotes possibility. "May be"
> could also denote possibility.- Hide quoted text -
The issue really isn't the legality of recording the call, after all,
if you record a call for your own private purposes no one will know
about it.
The issue is if a recording of a call is admissable as evidence to
support one side in a dispute. (Evidence in a court, consumer
protection agency, arbitrator, grievance panel, etc.) My own guess
is that in states that allow recording it could be, but in states that
prohibit recording clear consent, (such as the beep tone or formal
notice) is required.
My own speculation is that one of two things would happen in a
dispute with recorded evidence:
1) The othe party, upon seeing you have a definitive record of the
conversation clearly supporting your position, would pay up. -or-
2) The other party would fight it, using legal tricks to wear you out,
or would disappear altogether (e.g. a fly-by-night outfit).
Many disputes that can't be easily resolved are that way because the
evidence is not aboslutely clear; rather, both sides made errors, had
a misunderstanding, failed to do something required, etc. In other
words, it's not a black and white issue.
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:22:05 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Message-ID: <kcidnQGNKJDqeCfXnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@posted.visi>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> The issue really isn't the legality of recording the call, after all,
> if you record a call for your own private purposes no one will know
> about it.
>
> The issue is if a recording of a call is admissable as evidence to
> support one side in a dispute. (Evidence in a court, consumer
> protection agency, arbitrator, grievance panel, etc.)
I would disagree. In "two party permission" states, doing the
recording without permission isn't just inadmissible as evidence, it's
a criminal act that could get you fined or jailed.
> My own guess is that in states that allow recording it
> could be,
In one-party states, it is legal and permissible for either party to
record the conversation, without any notice whatsoever. I would
_assume_ that the only question in such states would be whether the
recording you made was a complete and unedited record of the
conversation (and, of course, whether it unambiguously supported your
position).
> but in states that prohibit recording, clear consent (such as the
> beep tone or formal notice) is required.
And the question was, does the statement "This call may be recorded"
constitute formal consent (I would think that "quality control" would
include the accuracy of the information you were given). And if it
does not constitute consent, why would it protect the party making the
statement?
But neither of us is a lawyer, and it is always possible that the
answer to the question has nothing to do with logic.
Dave
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: "www.Queensbridge.us" <NOTvalid@Queensbridge.us>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Guess What Texting Costs Your Wireless Provider?
Message-ID: <df1e4a83-f777-4c31-ba4b-f0b6037d742e@p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
On Sep 15, 10:50 am, "Tony Toews \[MVP\]" <tto...@telusplanet.net>
wrote:
> hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >As to anti-trust issues with cellphone companies, I'd like to know why
> >none offers a low-use phone where the minutes do not expire. Many
> >people would like to have a phone for very occasional use and no user
> >maintenance, but pre-paid phones require buying minutes that require
> >if not used and end up being almost as expensive as a regular line.
> >Seems to be a low-use plan might be $15/month with a $1/minute when
> >used.
>
> I'm currently on a $100 365 day plan with Virgin Mobile in
> Canada. Along with my starting $25 or $30, or whatever it was I'm
> now down to $95 and have had the phone since December. So I've
> used about $35 in 10 months at a rate of 30 cents per minute and
> same again for long distance if applicable.
>
> I'm their worst nightmare. Hehehehe
>
> BTW I don't mind paying the 30 cents per mniute for my usage.
> However 30 cents for long distance is ridiculous. It should be
> more like 5 or 10 cents per minute. Telus's, the local telco is
> 4 cents per minute anywhere in Canada or the US. Telus Mobility,
> their cell division, also charge 30 cents per minute long
> distance on prepaid cell phones.
You can add a OneSuite Canadian access number to your Virgin [or any
other Canadian cell phone] for long distance as low as 2¢ a minute
Local access in Toronto, Vancouver+ Or Canadian 800# for higher rate:
I use them here in USA on my home phone.
I understand that Virgin Canada phones will not work in USA, And USA
Virgin will not work in Canada. Is that correct?
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:55:15 GMT
From: "Tony Toews \[MVP\]" <ttoews@telusplanet.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Guess What Texting Costs Your Wireless Provider?
Message-ID: <9b2lb5pq17pg8anaem5l6n9imjrj44hvh1@4ax.com>
"www.Queensbridge.us" <NOTvalid@Queensbridge.us> wrote:
> You can add a OneSuite Canadian access number to your Virgin [or any
> other Canadian cell phone] for long distance as low as 2¢ a minute
> Local access in Toronto, Vancouver+ Or Canadian 800# for higher
> rate: I use them here in USA on my home phone.
Do you have a specific URL for how this works with Virgin Mobile
phones conveniently? Or is this a generic feature that works with all
prepaid long distance calling cards requiring you do dial a number,
enter your (I'm sure loooong) PIN, and then enter the phone number you
really wanted to dial?
> I understand that Virgin Canada phones will not work in USA, And USA
> Virgin will not work in Canada. Is that correct?
AFAIK all Canadian prepaid phones do not work in the USA and vice
versa. But postpaid Canadian phones do work in the USA and vice
versa. Although frequently at obscene roaming rates and ridiculous
charges just for entering a roaming area.
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
Granite Fleet Manager http://www.granitefleet.com/
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:06:00 -0400
From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: What could/would cause a SIM card to belly-up?
Message-ID: <op.u0qn4agyo63xbg@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 07:24:58 -0400, what Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
wrote ended with:
> I still don't fully understand why, over 5 years, about 15 numbers were
> saved in the phone and about 100 or so in the SIM (knowing (now) that
> storage into the SIM is the default).
With my current ancient Nokia 6610, which allows me to specify whether
I prefer SIM or Phone memory to be used for address book entries, even
if I choose SIM any phone number that's too long (or too complicated)
for the SIM to store without truncation gets stored on the phone
instead.
("Too long ... complicated": one with several PAUSE or WAIT entries,
for example -- 1-800-123-4567w456456456p789p123, or the like.)
Or perhaps they're numbers you once just decided (too long ago to
remember doing so, or why) to move to the phone's memory area.
Also: the RAZR in particular, as I recall, will permit VoiceDialing
(or do I mean one- (or two- ?) digit "instant" dialing instead?) only
for numbers stored in the phone's memory, not for those stored on SIM.
Perhaps that is why those 15 or so are in the phone?
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:00:50 -0700
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: What could/would cause a SIM card to belly-up?
Message-ID: <4ABAE0E2.4060601@thadlabs.com>
On 9/23/2009 7:22 PM, tlvp wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 07:24:58 -0400, what Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
> wrote ended with:
>
>> I still don't fully understand why, over 5 years, about 15 numbers were
>> saved in the phone and about 100 or so in the SIM (knowing (now) that
>> storage into the SIM is the default).
> [...]
> Also: the RAZR in particular, as I recall, will permit VoiceDialing
> (or do I mean one- (or two- ?) digit "instant" dialing instead?) only
> for numbers stored in the phone's memory, not for those stored on SIM.
> Perhaps that is why those 15 or so are in the phone?
BINGO! That's exactly correct. Those were numbers I entered with the
"Voice Dialing" option way back in 2004/2005. I had actually forgotten
about that capability (and pictures, videos and other stuff associated
with any given number) forcing numbers to the phone's memory (5MB) vs.
the SIM memory (64KB) since I don't use the phone while driving except
for a 911 call. That also explains the "odd" icon alongside those few
numbers -- Motorola docs (for the RAZR) are not really comprehensive.
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:30:34 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which students are gay, raising new questions about online privacy
Message-ID: <p062408d4c6e0a5d74095@[10.0.1.3]>
Project 'Gaydar'
At MIT, an experiment identifies which students are gay, raising new
questions about online privacy
By Carolyn Y. Johnson, Globe Staff | September 20, 2009
The Boston Globe
It started as a simple term project for an MIT class on ethics and
law on the electronic frontier.
Two students partnered up to take on the latest Internet fad: the
online social networks that were exploding into the mainstream. With
people signing up in droves to reconnect with classmates and old
crushes from high school, and even becoming online "friends" with
their family members, the two wondered what the online masses were
unknowingly telling the world about themselves. The pair weren't
interested in the embarrassing photos or overripe profiles that
attract so much consternation from parents and potential employers.
Instead, they wondered whether the basic currency of interactions on
a social network - the simple act of "friending" someone online -
might reveal something a person might rather keep hidden.
Using data from the social network Facebook, they made a striking
discovery: just by looking at a person's online friends, they could
predict whether the person was gay. They did this with a software
program that looked at the gender and sexuality of a person's friends
and, using statistical analysis, made a prediction. The two students
had no way of checking all of their predictions, but based on their
own knowledge outside the Facebook world, their computer program
appeared quite accurate for men, they said. People may be effectively
"outing" themselves just by the virtual company they keep.
...
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/09/20/project_gaydar_an_mit_experiment_raises_new_questions_about_online_privacy/
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.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
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) 2009 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.
End of The Telecom digest (9 messages)
|
or 