[comp.dcom.telecom] Risks of Computerfax

eli@pws.bull.com (12/29/89)

Commercial email to fax gateways are beginning to hit the market.
I've been faxing email for people for many months, and one problem
which recurs is people supplying me with incorrect fax numbers.  I
usually try a voice call first, to ensure that the destination phone
number is indeed answered by a fax machine.  Occasionally it is not,
and I am forced to confuse the innocent person who answers.  Often,
the person can supply me with the correct fax number.

This problem is compounded with fully automated computerfax systems.
Some computerfax hardware is able to detect voice on the line, and
hence "do the right thing": don't call again, and return an error.
Some computerfax systems do not properly detect voice, and they might
redial the phone number N times before returning an error.

One solution might be to use computerfax hardware that has the
capability to play digitized voice and ask the recipient to press
touch tones to indicate his annoyance level!  Most computerfax
hardware does not have this capability, unfortunately.

A risk is that blue network meanies would purposely ask for a fax to
be delivered to a non-fax number, in order to cause an "annoyance".
Annoyance calls are illegal.  I wonder whether the computerfax machine
owner is liable for such calls, or whether the sender is responsible?
(comp.dcom.telecom cats can probably answer this question.)

We've seen the uproar in Washington about junk faxes...  Computerfax
opens the door for an email user to cause junk fax, intentionally or
unintentionally.


; Steve Elias
; work phone:  508 671 7556 ;   email:  eli@pws.bull.com , eli@spdcc.com
; voice mail:  617 932 5598 ;