Heartmate@cup.portal.com (09/30/89)
Hi, Patrick -- Hope you can help me. I understand there was an on-going debate on the comp.dcom.telecom. newsgroup about ANI and Invasion of Privacy. It appears to have been dropped from the system I use (Portal) -- anyway I can get access to the information/debate? Alternatively, if you could point me to somebody who might be able to share some general information with me I'd appreciate it. What I am specifically interested in is the following -- I've heard that at least two class action lawsuits have been filed against AT&T in NJ and Florida -- this is not direct information so it may be a little confused -- what I want to know is: is this true? What's the status? Anything else that relates to the topic. Also what other states are on the bandwagon? Noticed a post re. Maryland on the newsgroup today. Hope to hear from you soon. [Moderator's Note: Not *that* topic again, please! Perhaps a couple of the readers who were the most prolific on the subject here will kindly write correspondent with their views. Although if anyone knows anything about the 'class action suits' he alludes to, that news would be welcome. But I suspect the suits would be against local telcos rather than AT&T would they not? PT]
tel@hound.att.com (Thomas E Lowe) (10/03/89)
>I've heard that at least two class action lawsuits have been filed >against AT&T in NJ and Florida >[Moderator's Note: >But I suspect the suits would be against local telcos rather than AT&T >would they not? PT] Not necessarily. AT&T does provide ANI information to many large telemarketing firms. Many of the 800 numbers you call to order merchandise from have this service. Most of it, if not all, is provided using MegaCom service and/or ISDN services. I would think this would make AT&T as venerable to a suit as the telcos. I personally know of no suits against AT&T or local telcos. Tom Lowe tel@hound.ATT.COM or att!hound!tel 201-949-0428 AT&T Bell Laboratories, Room 2E-637A Crawfords Corner Road, Holmdel, NJ 07733 (R) UNIX is a registered trademark of AT&T (keep them lawyers happy!!) [Moderator's Note: But unlike the telcos, AT&T provides the information for billing purposes. The telcos provide it out of customer curiosity for the information. If the litigants want to sue AT&T, at least where the provision of telephone numbers for billing is concerned, what would be their complaint? That the person who pays for a phone call has no right to know what calls they are paying for? If I pay for your phone calls, it is an invasion of *your* privacy to tell *me* the details of the connections established? PT]
ms6b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu) (10/06/89)
> [Moderator's Note: But unlike the telcos, AT&T provides the information > for billing purposes. AT&T provides caller identification over a Primary Rate Interface D channel in real time as an ISDN service. (Although it does not exactly conform to Q.931) This is not the same as providing the information on tape once a month for billing purposes. The service is specifically designed for telemarketing firms to be used to look up customer records. It is CLI, not ANI.
la063249@tuck.fit.edu (Huttig) (10/09/89)
What is the difference between ANI and CLI ?