X-NEWS: eisner comp.dcom.telecom: 8788 Relay-Version: VMS News - V6.1 30/1/93 VAX/VMS V5.5-2; site eisner.decus.org Path: eisner.decus.org!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!telecom-request Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: A Competitor to 1-900-STOPPER Message-ID: From: Will Martin Date: Sat, 4 Sep 93 14:40:20 CDT Sender: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Approved: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 622, Message 6 of 8 Lines: 46 There's a full-page ad on the back cover of the new (Oct. 93) issue of American Survival Guide magazine, advertising a competitor to the longstanding 1-900-STOPPER no-trace-call service. This one has both a domestic and an international service, the domestic for $1.99 a minute (four cents over 1-900-STOPPER's rates) and the international at $3.99 per minute. The numbers are: 1-900-PREVENT (1-900-773-8368) for domestic, and 1-900-STONEWALL (1-900-786-6392 plus a couple extra digits there... :-) for international. The ad text makes a big deal about the untraceability of the calls, with no allusions to the Esteemed Moderator's earlier comments about what might happen if things are serious enough for the call records of this business to be subpoenaed ... they claim that "they" don't 'have a record of the number you call when going through their service, but I doubt if there is any way to prevent the telco from having a record. Will [Moderator's Note: If they choose not to be a common carrier, they are free to keep no records if that is their preferred method of operation. Lacking records and lacking common carrier status, they are responsible for the use of their instruments like anyone else. If a harassing or fraud call is traced back to their system, you don't get into a long discussion with them about how it must have been one of their customers and there is no way to figure it out, etc; you just file the complaint against them. You sue the proprietor(s) of PREVENT and state that they are using their phones fraudulently, unlawfully, whatever. Let them worry about it. The guy who runs STOPPER has been sued a few times; it is just part of the cost of doing business and built into his rates. Why anyone would use those services when they could dial *67 instead is a mystery to me. If they choose common carrier status, i.e. like Sprint or AT&T, then truly, they are not responsible for the actions of thier customers/clients. But on the other hand, they have easily obtainable records. As soon as you grant those guys a middle ground -- that they have the legal right to act in an irresponsible manner when they knew or should have known the way their telephone instruments were being used -- then the only loser is you. I used to hear the same rap from the guys running phreak BBSs all the time, that they kept no user records, as if that was gonna mean anything in court. If you have no records of any users, then YOU are the user! PAT]