Stop Fake or No Caller ID Calls From CoS: Calls: FCC Wants to Stop Caller ID Spoofing

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
The FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM ) seeks comments on their proposed rules to implement the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009 (Truth in Caller ID Act, or Act), signed into law on December 22, 2010. This would effect direct and third party users of misleading Caller IDs, with certain exceptions.

Many times calls made on behalf of Scientology are done using no caller ID or an inaccurate one in their telemarketing calls. Sometimes personal cell phones are used via FSMs. All these annoying and often times harassing calls usually are treated as being under the protections of FCC rules for non-profit organizations. It's frustrating that nothing gets done about them. Now there is a new avenue being opened because of the Truth in Caller ID Act which was will help in getting the church sanctioned for not showing accurate Caller ID. This would apply to any callers misusing Caller ID. The below article explains it better. Below that, the link to the FCC full proposal. Your comments to the FCC are important, which ever way you feel about the fines and who gets them.)

FCC Wants to Stop Caller ID SpoofingCourthouse News Service Monday, March 28, 2011Last Update: 10:02 PM PT

WASHINGTON (CN) - The Federal Communications Commission is implementing a provision of the Truth in Caller ID Act that prohibits caller ID spoofing with the intent to defraud, cause harm or wrongfully obtain anything of value. Caller ID spoofing enables a caller to use a caller ID that is not accurate to gain an advantage over the person who answers.

The proposed rules exempt "any authorized activity of a law enforcement agency," "court orders that specifically authorize the use of caller identification manipulation," and "lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a state or a political subdivision of a state, or of an intelligence agency of the United States."

The agency requests comments on whether penalties for violation of the rules should be assigned only to the caller, or also to third-party providers who do not take actions that may prevent the caller from engaging in the ruse. Penalties for violation of the rules will be determined based on balancing factors that include "the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation, and, with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and such other matters as justice may require," according to the proposed rule.

The Truth in Caller ID Act and the proposed rules do not require "willful" or "repeated" violations to justify imposition of a penalty. Penalties are not to exceed $10,000 for each violation, or three times that amount for each day of a continuing violation, except that the amount assessed for any continuing violation is not to exceed a total of $1 million for any single act or failure to act, under the law and proposed rules.
The agency also seeks comments to assist in preparing a statutorily required report to Congress on whether additional legislation is necessary to prohibit the provision of inaccurate caller identification information in successor or replacement technologies to telecommunications services or IP-enabled voice services.
-----------------------------------------------

Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-41
Before the Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the
Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009
)
)
)
)
WC Docket No. 11-39
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKINGAdopted: March 9, 2011 Released: March 9, 2011
Comment Date: April 18, 2011

By the Commission:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), we seek comment on proposed rules to implement the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009 (Truth in Caller ID Act, or Act), signed into law on December 22, 2010.
[..] read on
http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0322/FCC-11-41A1.txt
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
'Bout Freekin' Time!

:yes:

And a scientologist who stands to be effected by it. Thank God!

GetPaidForCallerID offers unique revenue sharing opportunities for companies making 100K+ outbound calls per month.

Company Biographies
Herb Zerden, CEO ZEH LLC, overseas each aspect of the company. A diligent task-master with adept technical skills, Herb manages a technical team that consistently out-performs every industry c. Previously Herb was Chief Operations Officer, Chief Information Officer and Co-Founder of Mueller Energy Group, Inc.

Herb is a successful entrepreneur and operations executive with extensive experience in the creation and management of start-up and mid-size organizations in both the energy and telecommunications industries. He founded and sold his multi-million dollar telecommunications start-up to an international telecommunications organization. Following the sale of his company, Herb functioned as an energy industry consultant and business development expert for several East Coast energy marketing customer acquisition companies.
http://www.getpaidforcallerid.com/about.php

Yeah, he was this successful.....

Victims in foreclosure scam repaid nearly $400,000 Author: Aissatou Sidimé STAFF
Section: Business Publish Date: March 13, 2009 Document ID: 126EC2F76C53FDF0

Foreclosure Assistance Solutions Inc. has repaid more than $390,000 to Texans who were victims of its deceptive trade practices, according to the Texas attorney general.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott announced the conclusion of the court-mandated repayments at a Thursday news conference in San Antonio.

A Bexar County district judge had ordered the company's principals, Herb Zerden and Adolfo Quintero, to repay a total of $750,000, which includes $475,000 in... Read more
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we...page=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
I know scientologists pride themselves on their communication abilities - so why do they just hang up without saying one word when they get the answering machine - is that communication ?

And what is with hiding the real name and number they are calling from - are they ashemed to be reprexenting the C o $ ?
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
WASHINGTON (CN) - The Federal Communications Commission is implementing a provision of the Truth in Caller ID Act that prohibits caller ID spoofing with the intent to defraud, cause harm or wrongfully obtain anything of value. Caller ID spoofing enables a caller to use a caller ID that is not accurate to gain an advantage over the person who answers.

Would this still apply if all the CofS is doing is trying to get someone to answer the call?

As far as I know (I could be wrong), the only intent of the obfuscation is to get the target to pick up the phone, not to hide the source once contact has been made. Not that that makes it OK, of course!

Paul
 
jeeeeeee...yayzizzzzz

:yes:

And a scientologist who stands to be effected by it. Thank God!

GetPaidForCallerID offers unique revenue sharing opportunities for companies making 100K+ outbound calls per month.

Company Biographies
Herb Zerden, CEO ZEH LLC, overseas each aspect of the company. A diligent task-master with adept technical skills, Herb manages a technical team that consistently out-performs every industry c. Previously Herb was Chief Operations Officer, Chief Information Officer and Co-Founder of Mueller Energy Group, Inc.

Herb is a successful entrepreneur and operations executive with extensive experience in the creation and management of start-up and mid-size organizations in both the energy and telecommunications industries. He founded and sold his multi-million dollar telecommunications start-up to an international telecommunications organization. Following the sale of his company, Herb functioned as an energy industry consultant and business development expert for several East Coast energy marketing customer acquisition companies.
http://www.getpaidforcallerid.com/about.php

Yeah, he was this successful.....

Victims in foreclosure scam repaid nearly $400,000 Author: Aissatou Sidimé STAFF
Section: Business Publish Date: March 13, 2009 Document ID: 126EC2F76C53FDF0

Foreclosure Assistance Solutions Inc. has repaid more than $390,000 to Texans who were victims of its deceptive trade practices, according to the Texas attorney general.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott announced the conclusion of the court-mandated repayments at a Thursday news conference in San Antonio.

A Bexar County district judge had ordered the company's principals, Herb Zerden and Adolfo Quintero, to repay a total of $750,000, which includes $475,000 in... Read more
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we...page=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

when kathy and i split from FCDC in 1974 we took a bus cross town to hitchhike north to Philly. Took a while to flag down a car and it proved to be no stranger but a staffmember ho recognized us, Herb Zerden.

We got in and he pulled into traffic and asked where we were going. We told him. He looked at us before shaking his head and saying... [later, computer time done]
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Would this still apply if all the CofS is doing is trying to get someone to answer the call?

As far as I know (I could be wrong), the only intent of the obfuscation is to get the target to pick up the phone, not to hide the source once contact has been made. Not that that makes it OK, of course!

Paul

It would not matter. If the person is being harassed by the caller, the law would apply. IAS reg calls, basic books sales calls.... event calls.... If one believes that the calls fit any of these categories below, and a misleading caller ID is used by the caller, the law would apply.

The idea is that the caller called using a spoofed or inaccurate, misleading or inaccurate Caller ID ( even using another's cell phone) to "to knowingly transmit misleading or inaccurate caller identification information with the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value,",".

Keep in mind that this law is now in effect in the USA. The fines are the issue of the current discussion at the FCC. People can anbd should file complaints about calls that fit the law.

S. 30
One Hundred Eleventh Congress
of the United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten
An Act To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit manipulation of caller identification information.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009’’.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION REGARDING MANIPULATION OF CALLER IDENTIFICATION
INFORMATION.
Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.227) is amended—
(1) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), and (g) as subsections
(f), (g), and (h), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new subsection:
‘‘(e) PROHIBITION ON PROVISION OF INACCURATE CALLER IDENTIFICATION
INFORMATION.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—It shall be unlawful for any person
within the United States, in connection with any telecommunications
service or IP-enabled voice service, to cause any caller
identification service to knowingly transmit misleading or inaccurate
caller identification information with the intent to
defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value,
unless such transmission is exempted pursuant to paragraph
(3)(B).
‘‘(2) PROTECTION FOR BLOCKING CALLER IDENTIFICATION
INFORMATION.—Nothing in this subsection may be construed
to prevent or restrict any person from blocking the capability
of any caller identification service to transmit caller identification
information.
‘‘(3) REGULATIONS.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 6 months after the
date of enactment of the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009,
the Commission shall prescribe regulations to implement
this subsection.
‘‘(B) CONTENT OF REGULATIONS.—
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The regulations required under
subparagraph (A) shall include such exemptions from
the prohibition under paragraph (1) as the Commission
determines is appropriate.
‘‘(ii) SPECIFIC EXEMPTION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES OR COURT ORDERS.—The regulations required
S. 30—2
under subparagraph (A) shall exempt from the prohibition
under paragraph (1) transmissions in connection
with—
‘‘(I) any authorized activity of a law enforcement
agency; or
‘‘(II) a court order that specifically authorizes
the use of caller identification manipulation.
‘‘(4) REPORT.—Not later than 6 months after the enactment
of the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009, the Commission shall
report to Congress whether additional legislation is necessary
to prohibit the provision of inaccurate caller identification
information in technologies that are successor or replacement
technologies to telecommunications service or IP-enabled voice
service.
‘‘(5) PENALTIES.—
‘‘(A) CIVIL FORFEITURE.—
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Any person that is determined
by the Commission, in accordance with paragraphs
(3) and (4) of section 503(b), to have violated this
subsection shall be liable to the United States for a
forfeiture penalty. A forfeiture penalty under this paragraph
shall be in addition to any other penalty provided
for by this Act. The amount of the forfeiture penalty
determined under this paragraph shall not exceed
$10,000 for each violation, or 3 times that amount
for each day of a continuing violation, except that
the amount assessed for any continuing violation shall
not exceed a total of $1,000,000 for any single act
or failure to act.
‘‘(ii) RECOVERY.—Any forfeiture penalty determined
under clause (i) shall be recoverable pursuant
to section 504(a).
‘‘(iii) PROCEDURE.—No forfeiture liability shall be
determined under clause (i) against any person unless
such person receives the notice required by section
503(b)(3) or section 503(b)(4).
‘‘(iv) 2-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.—No forfeiture
penalty shall be determined or imposed against
any person under clause (i) if the violation charged
occurred more than 2 years prior to the date of issuance
of the required notice or notice or apparent liability.
‘‘(B) CRIMINAL FINE.—Any person who willfully and
knowingly violates this subsection shall upon conviction
thereof be fined not more than $10,000 for each violation,
or 3 times that amount for each day of a continuing violation,
in lieu of the fine provided by section 501 for such
a violation. This subparagraph does not supersede the
provisions of section 501 relating to imprisonment or the
imposition of a penalty of both fine and imprisonment.
‘‘(6) ENFORCEMENT BY STATES.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The chief legal officer of a State,
or any other State officer authorized by law to bring actions
on behalf of the residents of a State, may bring a civil
action, as parens patriae, on behalf of the residents of
that State in an appropriate district court of the United
States to enforce this subsection or to impose the civil
penalties for violation of this subsection, whenever the
S. 30—3
chief legal officer or other State officer has reason to believe
that the interests of the residents of the State have been
or are being threatened or adversely affected by a violation
of this subsection or a regulation under this subsection.
‘‘(B) NOTICE.—The chief legal officer or other State
officer shall serve written notice on the Commission of
any civil action under subparagraph (A) prior to initiating
such civil action. The notice shall include a copy of the
complaint to be filed to initiate such civil action, except
that if it is not feasible for the State to provide such
prior notice, the State shall provide such notice immediately
upon instituting such civil action.
‘‘(C) AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE.—Upon receiving the
notice required by subparagraph (B), the Commission shall
have the right—
‘‘(i) to intervene in the action;
‘‘(ii) upon so intervening, to be heard on all matters
arising therein; and
‘‘(iii) to file petitions for appeal.
‘‘(D) CONSTRUCTION.—For purposes of bringing any
civil action under subparagraph (A), nothing in this paragraph
shall prevent the chief legal officer or other State
officer from exercising the powers conferred on that officer
by the laws of such State to conduct investigations or
to administer oaths or affirmations or to compel the attendance
of witnesses or the production of documentary and
other evidence.
‘‘(E) VENUE; SERVICE OR PROCESS.—
‘‘(i) VENUE.—An action brought under subparagraph
(A) shall be brought in a district court of the
United States that meets applicable requirements
relating to venue under section 1391 of title 28, United
States Code.
‘‘(ii) SERVICE OF PROCESS.—In an action brought
under subparagraph (A)—
‘‘(I) process may be served without regard to
the territorial limits of the district or of the State
in which the action is instituted; and
‘‘(II) a person who participated in an alleged
violation that is being litigated in the civil action
may be joined in the civil action without regard
to the residence of the person.
‘‘(7) EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.—This subsection does not
prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or
intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United
States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or of
an intelligence agency of the United States.
‘‘(8) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this subsection:
‘‘(A) CALLER IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION.—The term
‘caller identification information’ means information provided
by a caller identification service regarding the telephone
number of, or other information regarding the origination
of, a call made using a telecommunications service
or IP-enabled voice service.
‘‘(B) CALLER IDENTIFICATION SERVICE.—The term ‘caller
identification service’ means any service or device designed
S. 30—4
to provide the user of the service or device with the telephone
number of, or other information regarding the origination
of, a call made using a telecommunications service
or IP-enabled voice service. Such term includes automatic
number identification services.
‘‘(C) IP-ENABLED VOICE SERVICE.—The term ‘IP-enabled
voice service’ has the meaning given that term by section
9.3 of the Commission’s regulations (47 C.F.R. 9.3), as
those regulations may be amended by the Commission
from time to time.
‘‘(9) LIMITATION.—Notwithstanding any other provision of
this section, subsection (f) shall not apply to this subsection
or to the regulations under this subsection.’’.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111s30enr/pdf/BILLS-111s30enr.pdf
 
Top