lear@ARAMIS.RUTGERS.EDU (eliot lear) (09/27/87)
How many people would like to know who is calling them before they pick up a phone? NJ Bell has developed a service that will tell you the number of the person on the other end. Word is that they will begin betatesting around November. The question of the day: Is it legal? What if you have an unlisted number and do not want it revealed? Has Ma Belle Broken a contract she made with you? -- Eliot Lear [lear@rutgers.edu]
wes@engr.UKy.EDU.UUCP (09/29/87)
lear@ARAMIS.RUTGERS.EDU (eliot lear) writes: > > > How many people would like to know who is calling them before they > pick up a phone? I sure would...now if I can just wire in a busy signal for the folks I don't want to talk with........ > The question of the day: Is it > legal? What if you have an unlisted number and do not want it > revealed? Has Ma Belle Broken a contract she made with you? > Hmmmmmm.....it seems me that unlisted numbers should be protected in some way. Now, Ma Bell might charge you for this additional protection, but if they offer it to you, they are effectively out of their contractual obligations. The mere fact that it was available to you and you didn't take it negates the contract. <I think>.... > -- > Eliot Lear > [lear@rutgers.edu] Wes Morgan
tedk@ihuxv.UUCP (Kekatos) (09/30/87)
In article <1692@aramis.rutgers.edu> lear@ARAMIS.RUTGERS.EDU (eliot lear) writes: > > >How many people would like to know who is calling them before they >pick up a phone? NJ Bell has developed a service that will tell you >the number of the person on the other end. Word is that they will >begin betatesting around November. The question of the day: Is it >legal? What if you have an unlisted number and do not want it >revealed? Has Ma Belle Broken a contract she made with you? > >-- >Eliot Lear >[lear@rutgers.edu] Dear Eliot, This fab new feature is brought to you by the labor of your buddies here at AT&T Bell Labs, Indian Hill. It's called..... IIIIIIII SSSSSSS DDDDDD NNNN NNN II SSS S DD D NN N NN II SSS DD D NN N NN II SSSSS DD D NN N NN II SSSSS DD D NN N NN II SSS DD D NN N NN II S SSS DD D NN NNN IIIIIIII SSSSSSS DDDDDD NNNN NNN Yes, all the legal queations have been answered. There is a option where the caller can withhold the display of their directory number -- Ted --
andy@ROCKY.STANFORD.EDU (Andy Freeman) (10/01/87)
There is a simple, but expensive, way to get around most of the
problems with an unlisted number when the caller's number is revealed.
Namely, get two lines and disable the ringer on one and use it
for outgoing calls and unlist the other. Then all you have to
worry about is an association between the listed phone's number
and you. The first thing is to de-list its address. Perhaps
a wrong name as well. Then all you have to worry about is
phone company security :-), and whether they give out information
they shouldn't :-(.
-andy
ps - It may be cheapter to just use a pay phone for calls to
people who shouldn't have your number.
--
Andy Freeman
UUCP: {arpa gateways, decwrl, sun, hplabs, rutgers}!sushi.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA: andy@sushi.stanford.edu
(415) 329-1718/723-3088 home/cl Rl Rldavidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) (10/02/87)
In article <1605@ukecc.engr.uky.edu> wes@engr.UKy.EDU (Wes Morgan) writes: | |I sure would...now if I can just wire in a busy signal for the folks |I don't want to talk with........ | |> The question of the day: Is it |> legal? What if you have an unlisted number and do not want it |> revealed? Has Ma Belle Broken a contract she made with you? |> |Hmmmmmm.....it seems me that unlisted numbers should be protected in |some way. Now, Ma Bell might charge you for this additional protection, |but if they offer it to you, they are effectively out of their contractual |obligations. The mere fact that it was available to you and you didn't take |it negates the contract. <I think>.... I would not see a problem here. Your number is unlisted, but you can give it to people if you choose. I don't see that giving the number by calling someone is in need of protection. If you don't want them to have your number, don't call. I'm suspicious of anyone who wants to make untraceable calls, and it defeats the reason for having the "know your caller" service. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
sr16+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Seth Benjamin Rothenberg) (10/07/87)
This question makes me think of the 2 minutes-to-trace claim.
Now that the long distance carriers need to know the calling
number prior to completing a call, the equipment is in place
so that a trace should be instantaneous. It may require that
the tracee be switched onto the same equipment as the 950-
exchanges use, but that should not be hard. Does anyone
know if the time has, in fact, decreased?
And No, I don't want people to know where I am calling from.
If I say I am at home, I don't want them to know I am at
{the movies, ball park, concert}...
Sethkaufman@SHASTA.STANFORD.EDU (Marc Kaufman) (10/08/87)
In article <2149@ihuxv.ATT.COM> moss!ihuxv!tedk@RUTGERS.EDU (55624-Kekatos,T.G.) writes: .>begin betatesting around November. The question of the day: Is it .>legal? What if you have an unlisted number and do not want it .>revealed? Has Ma Belle Broken a contract she made with you? (re: ISDN)... >Yes, all the legal queations have been answered. There >is a option where the caller can withhold the display of >their directory number However.. the current specification for ISDN 911 calls provides that the call will NOT go through if the caller withholds the number! Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Shasta.stanford.edu)
g-inners@gumby.UUCP (Michael Inners) (10/09/87)
After some thought, I've decided that this 'ID the calling location' service bothers me. Rather than get into a philosphical discussion, I think a few simple examples illustrate the reasons: 1) I am involved in a number of non-profit organizations as a financial officer. I occasionally have reason to call the IRS information numbers to ask questions about practices (generally inherited from previous officers) that I have doubts about. I *DO NOT* want to identify myself and bring on their dogs - only fix our practices and comply in the future. 2) I remotely retrieve my answering machine messages from time to time. When returning calls, I sometimes do not want to reveal my actual location. Why? Perhaps personal, perhaps I'm moonlighting, perhaps it is just none of anyone else's business! Since the service probably can't be eliminated, I would propose that there be a required warning signal that alerts me that my location is about to be disclosed the the party on the other end. I can then choose to hang up before the phone starts ringing. This warning should be free and issued at all times, not just when I call from my home number. There is precedent for such a rule in that devices designed to record phone conversations are required to emit a 'beep' tone to alert the other party. Since the ID service is offered by large centralized organiations (TelCos) such a rule would be far more readily enforceable than for recording devices. -- Michael Inners
jack@swlabs.UUCP (Jack Bonn) (10/16/87)
In article <1073@gumby.wisc.edu>, g-inners@gumby.UUCP (Michael Inners) writes: > There is precedent for such a rule in that devices designed to record phone > conversations are required to emit a 'beep' tone to alert the other party. I this the case? I thought it was only necessary when there was a chance that neither party was knowledgeable about the recording device. If either party (me, if I'm operating the machine) knows it is operating, I thought that no tone was necessary. I have another question. I understand that the # is sometimes used as an EOP (end of pulsing) indication. I have seen it documented as a mechanism for telling the office collecting the digits for an international call that there are no more digits to follow. This allows the call to complete faster since the alternative is to use timing as the indication that the caller has finished dialing. I have been using this for calls of the form 1-PPP-NNNN where the PPP prefix may very well also indicate a valid area code somewhere in the US. Does this really help? Or am I wasting my time? -- Jack Bonn, <> Software Labs, Ltd, Box 451, Easton CT 06612 uunet!swlabs!jack
g-inners@GUMBY.WISC.EDU (Michael Inners) (10/19/87)
In article <550@swlabs.UUCP> jack@swlabs.UUCP (Jack Bonn) writes: > >In article <1073@gumby.wisc.edu>, g-inners@gumby.UUCP (Michael Inners) writes: >> There is precedent for such a rule in that devices designed to record phone >> conversations are required to emit a 'beep' tone to alert the other party. > >I this the case? I thought it was only necessary when there was a chance >that neither party was knowledgeable about the recording device. If either >party (me, if I'm operating the machine) knows it is operating, I thought >that no tone was necessary. According to the Wisconsin Bell (Ameritech) people: "If your conversation is being recorded for business or other reasons, one of the following MUST apply: All parties to the conversation must give their prior consent to the recording of the conversation and the prior consent must be obtained in writing or be part of and obtained at the start of the recording. Or, A distinctive recorder 'beep' tone, repeated every 15 seconds, is required to alert all parties when the recording equipment is in use." It then gives a few exceptions for law enforcement, 911 numbers, and broadcasters recording for rebroadcast. I also believe that the FCC requires that this beep tone be generated by all FCC-certified equipment intended for direct connection to the telephone network. -- Michael Inners
LENOIL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU (10/23/87)
>I would not see a problem here. Your number is unlisted, but you can >give it to people if you choose. I don't see that giving the number by >calling someone is in need of protection. If you don't want them to have >your number, don't call. I'm suspicious of anyone who wants to make >untraceable calls, and it defeats the reason for having the "know your >caller" service. Scenario 1: Ms. Smith calls Johnny's parents to talk about his D in history. Johnny, who answered the phone, takes down Ms. Smith's number and makes harassing calls from a payphone to her for the next 6 weeks. Scenario 2: An unscrupulous worker for a confidential crisis hotline saves the phone numbers of unsuspecting callers and uses them for purposes of extortion. ...These are only two examples; I can think of many more. The point is, I don't think you can fairly say that just because I am calling you, I must forfeit my right to privacy. Robert Lenoil