CER2520@ritvax.bitnet (Curtis E. Reid) (10/27/89)
I read a notice of proposed tariff filing for billing name and address
service by New York Telephone in the legal section of the newspaper
yesterday. I quote:
Notice is hereby given that a proposed tariff has been filed with the
Public Service Commission, to be effective December 1, 1989, to
introduce Billing Name and Address (BNA) Service.
BNA Service is the provision of the complete billing name, street
address, city or town, state and zip code for a telephone number
assigned by New York Telephone.
BNA Service is provided for the sole purpose of permitting the
customer to bill its telecommunications services to its end users.
[ Rates shown here ]
Further, an amendment to the offering of Non-Published Service has
been filed to specify that BNA information on a non-published number
will be provided to a BNA subscriber when a call utilizing the BNA
subscriber's service originates from that non-published number.
End quote. Now, my question is this similar to reverse directory that
readers has been discussing here? Or, is this similar to the way that
AT&T pass the number to another telephone company for the purpose of
billing? This tariff is a bit unclear as to what the real purpose is
for.
Curtis Reid
CER2520@RITVAX.Bitnet
CER2520%RITVAX.Bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Internet)
CER2520@vaxd.isc.rit.edu (NYSernet)eravin@dasys1.UUCP (Ed Ravin) (11/10/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0474m01@vector.dallas.tx.us> CER2520@ritvax.bitnet (Curtis E. Reid) writes: >I read a notice of proposed tariff [...] >BNA Service is the provision of the complete billing name, street >address, city or town, state and zip code for a telephone number >assigned by New York Telephone. >BNA Service is provided for the sole purpose of permitting the >customer to bill its telecommunications services to its end users. >Further, an amendment to the offering of Non-Published Service has >been filed to specify that BNA information on a non-published number >will be provided to a BNA subscriber when a call utilizing the BNA >subscriber's service originates from that non-published number. The term "telecommunications services" is a wee bit vague. If we're talking about common carrier service, that is, telephone service, then this says that organizations that provide phone service to their users but only know their user's phone numbers can buy the name and address from the telco so the organization can ostensibly bill their users. But why doesn't the organization know who its users are? If the service provider got a phone number from the user, why didn't the provider ask the user for a name and address at the same time? Maybe this is to allow the provider to have casual users, so that anyone can call the provider and make use of these "telecommunications services". The provider gets the user's phone number via Caller ID, and the user's name and address via the BNA tariff described above. Unlisted number? Tough, the telco will deliver your name and address anyway. Now suppose that these "telecommunications services" aren't just long distance phone calls or something telecom oriented. Suppose you're calling Dial-A-Porn or a 900 number. Now the provider can harrass you directly for the large bill someone ran up on your phone line. They can pass your name to a collection agency, and your old recourse of bitching to the telco or bitching to the public utility commission about the telco's participation in this scheme is gone: you never see the telco's participation behind the scenes in supplying your name and address to the provider. How will the provider get the name and address information? Perhaps at the end of every month, when it's time to make out the bills, the provider will get on the phone and call a special operator who will supply the names and addresses? Fat chance. There will probably be some kind of data link, the provider's modem calls the special number and gets billed by ANI or whatnot. If the provider has enough traffic, it might be worthwhile to set up a leased line and keep the inquiry line for names and addresses open all the time. A user calls up for the provider's services. Perhaps the user is ordering a pizza. The user presses "1" for cheese pizza, "3" for anchovies, and "4" for mushrooms. The voice system reads back the order and the user presses "#" to confirm. The system then does a name and address inquiry, and writes a ticket for a pizza delivery. Your pizza arrives, cold as usual, but this time untouched by human hands. Anyone see the potentials for abuse here? An unscrupulous provider could subscribe to this service, and pretend to be getting names and addresses for billing customers but really doing lookup on people for marketing or surveillance reasons. A person's directory information, once thought to be a matter only between the telco, the person, and the phone book, is now sold to the highest bidder. Even unlisted numbers aren't safe anymore. If this stuff takes off like 900 and 540 number did, you can count on seeing all sorts of advertising campaigns: "Want to get a new Ronco combination nose-picker and vegetable-slicer delivered to your home? Just call 1-800-BUY-JUNK." I'd rather not think about what we'll see on the Saturday morning cartoon circuit. I hope someone can provide more information on this stuff and maybe prove me wrong. I plan on looking into it myself. But it sounds all too much like the general trend where telephone companies are not only selling telephone service, but also selling transactional information about telephone services, and all sorts of assumptions about the privacy of the telephone (or the commitments one makes by making phone calls) will have to change as the telcos cash in on "enterpreneurial spirit" which translates to fast bucks for sleazy operators. Ed Ravin | hombre!dasys1!eravin | "A mind is a terrible thing (BigElectricCatPublicUNIX)| eravin@dasys1.UUCP | to waste-- boycott TV!" +-------------------------+----------------------+----------------------------- Reader bears responsibility for all opinions expressed in this article. [Moderator's Note: Mr. Ravin's reference to pizza reminds me of a good item in the Telecom Archives: 'pizza.auto.nmbr.id', which is a discussion of this very topic which appeared some time ago in the Digest. Anyone who wants further research on this might want to pull that item from the archives with ftp. PT]