Steve Cirian <cirian@einstein.eds.com> (08/22/90)
Last night, I had a call from a computer at Kodak, trying to sell me something. After listening for a few moments, I lost interest, and hung up. I tried to call a friend a minute or two later. To my surprise, the recording was still going, and there was nothing I could do to break the connection. A thought occurred to me: what if I had an emergency, needed to call 911, and couldn't because Kodak had tied my phone up (for at least 5 minutes)? Is this legal? Shouldn't companies that use this sales strategy be required to have a system that would recognize a hangup, and break the connection? (I appologize if this subject has already been covered in detail, I am new to this newsgroup :-)) Steve Cirian 750 Tower Drive, Troy, MI 48007 (313) 265-5738
Chris Petrilli <petrilli@walt.cc.utexas.edu> (08/23/90)
In article <11213@accuvax.nwu.edu> cirian@einstein.eds.com (Steve Cirian) writes: >Last night, I had a call from a computer at Kodak, trying to sell me >something. After listening for a few moments, I lost interest, and >hung up. I tried to call a friend a minute or two later. To my >surprise, the recording was still going, and there was nothing I could >do to break the connection. A thought occurred to me: what if I had >an emergency, needed to call 911, and couldn't because Kodak had tied >my phone up (for at least 5 minutes)? Is this legal? Shouldn't >companies that use this sales strategy be required to have a system >that would recognize a hangup, and break the connection? I also had one of these "calls" about one week ago, which after fifteen MINUTES! was still on the line. It also kept calling back until I listened to it (it tried five times). To say the least I was annoyed (a little stronger word here), and I immediately called the Texas Attorney General the next day. According to the lady I talked to there, they are already investigating it, and looking at filing charges against them. When I phoned SWBT, they were unable to tell me who it was, but they had also had complaints, so they probably knew who it was, and they said that they had given the company one week to stop, or they would disconnect service, and look into legal action. Sounds like a major problem to me. Chris Petrilli "Opinons represented here University of Texas at Austin do not necessarily INTERNET: petrilli@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu represent those of a sane SNAILMAIL: 429 Brady Lane, Austin, Texas, 78746 person. Take them as PHONE: +1 512 327 0986 simply that."
John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com> (08/24/90)
Steve Cirian <cirian@einstein.eds.com> writes: > Last night, I had a call from a computer at Kodak, trying to sell me > something. After listening for a few moments, I lost interest, and > hung up. I tried to call a friend a minute or two later. To my > surprise, the recording was still going, and there was nothing I could > do to break the connection. If you have three-way calling, you can always flash the switchhook and make a call in that manner. My favorite method of handling these people provides double satisfaction. Although you theoretically cannot transfer a call outside of a Commstar group, there is a way to "trick" the switch into allowing a call to be transferred to another telephone within the control group (switch). In preparation for the hapless junk computer call, I prepare a list of slimy businesses that have telephone service served by applicable prefixes. This being a bedroom CO, there aren't many, but I managed to scrape up two or three. When the XYZ Portrait Offer calls, I simply transfer the call to Big Al's Used Cars or some such. It is no longer tying up my line and it gives Big Al something to do! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
CRW@icf.hrb.com (Craig R. Watkins) (08/24/90)
In article <11213@accuvax.nwu.edu>, cirian@einstein.eds.com (Steve Cirian) writes: > Last night, I had a call from a computer at Kodak, trying to sell me > something. Are you sure it was from Kodak and not just from some house that was possibly selling you Kodak products? I certainly don't rule out that it was Kodak, but that just doesn't seem like the kind of thing that Kodak does. (warning: written by ex-Kodak employee) Craig R. Watkins Internet: CRW@ICF.HRB.COM HRB Systems, Inc. Bitnet: CRW%HRB@PSUECL.Bitnet +1 814 238-4311 UUCP: ...!psuvax1!hrbicf!crw
v116kznd@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (David M Archer) (08/26/90)
In article <11301@accuvax.nwu.edu>, CRW@icf.hrb.com (Craig R. Watkins) writes... >> Last night, I had a call from a computer at Kodak, trying to sell me >> something. >Are you sure it was from Kodak and not just from some house that was >possibly selling you Kodak products? I certainly don't rule out that >it was Kodak, but that just doesn't seem like the kind of thing that >Kodak does. I recall getting the same call, and thinking the same thing, "Kodak has taken to computerized telemarketing? Odd.". So I listened a bit longer and it ended up being an independant company, most likely one of those companys that wants you to mail your film to them. I guess it was just another one of those cases where they are trying to mislead you, in this case, making the answerer think that the promotion/whatever is sponsored/whatever by a large company, Kodak. Another call which I seem to get every couple months, is one of those deals here they say to call within five minutes to claim a prize or something like that. With this one, the guy musically repeats the number to call over and over again ... to claim your prize, call 540-xxxx, 540-xxxx, the number to call is 540-xxxx, call 540-xxxx in five minutes to claim your prize, call 540-xxxx. And then the seedy part is where they are obligated to say how much the call costs, the guy musically mumbles, call costs $5.40. It's a fairly obvious attempt to make the listener not hear the cost of the call, while they are still legally stating the cost of the call. One might say someone would have to be pretty stupid to fall for that, but since you can't ask a recording a question, someone with bad hearing might not hear it quite right and not know it costs something. I guess that's progress. Nobody's walked up to me on the street and tried to sell me a Rolex lately, I guess they must have all moved to telemarketing.
tad@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Tad Cook) (08/29/90)
In article <11213@accuvax.nwu.edu>, cirian@einstein.eds.com (Steve Cirian) writes: > After listening for a few moments, I lost interest, and > hung up. I tried to call a friend a minute or two later. To my > surprise, the recording was still going, and there was nothing I could > do to break the connection. A thought occurred to me: what if I had > an emergency, needed to call 911, and couldn't because Kodak had tied > my phone up (for at least 5 minutes)? Is this legal? Shouldn't > companies that use this sales strategy be required to have a system > that would recognize a hangup, and break the connection? I had the same problem one time. I called US West, my local phone company, and they said that their switches were programmed to drop an incoming call no later than 22 seconds after the called party hangs up, assuming that the calling party stays off hook. The problem for the telemarketers is that there is no way to detect hookswitch status from the far end ... this is the same problem that private payphones have. But maybe they could listen for dialtone? The problem for emergency callers is that I am unlikely to wait for 22 seconds when I hang up and attempt to call 9-1-1 again. If I keep coming off hook every 10 seconds, which is an agonizing amount of time in an emergency, I will never lose the obnoxious sales call. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP