Verizon Wireless Files Another Lawsuit Against Telemarketers, Solely For PR Purposes

from the smoke-and-mirrors dept

On multiple occasions, Verizon Wireless has tried to gloss over its security shortcomings with PR-friendly lawsuits. The suits attempt to draw attention away from the company's inability to protect customers' private information or to stop telemarketers from harassing its subscribers. It's filed yet another one of these suits, alleging some unknown party made more than 1 million calls to its customers using an autodialer. While Verizon's trying to look tough, the suit really does little more than expose their own inadequacies again. It notes that the calls all carried the same or similar caller ID, and were made as quickly as once every .83 seconds. Given that, couldn't the company have take some action against them, instead of letting them go and deciding simply to file a pointless lawsuit against an unknown party?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Dave, May 4th, 2007 @ 10:18am

    huh?

    I may be missing something here... but how does a telemarketing firm using an autodialer (aka war dialer) have anything to do with Verizon not protecting company data? I can program a computer sequentially dial a million numbers (albeit not one ever .83 seconds) without knowing any of the customers personal info.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Ajax 4Hire, May 4th, 2007 @ 10:49am

      Re: huh? I agree, how is this Verizon's fault?

      A company auto-dials 1million Verizon cellphones and this is Verizon's fault? how?

      I have been subjected to this type of invasion;
      A call on my cellphone from a number I do not recognize.
      I answer and loose at least 1 minute of my peak time.
      Only to find it is a Spanish speaking pitch for activism.

      Not only does it p***, I mean make me upset, It also
      makes me upset with a group of people who would stoop
      to such Low tactics.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 4th, 2007 @ 11:19am

        Re: Re: huh? I agree, how is this Verizon's fault

        Its not Verizons fault it happened, its Verizons fault they did not stop it. It would not have been hard for Verizon to do, and if for some reason it IS hard for them to do, well, thats their fault, too. They shouldn't be so vulnerable.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Steven, May 4th, 2007 @ 12:00pm

          Re: Re: Re: huh? I agree, how is this Verizon's f

          So it's good, even a requirement, for Verizon to block calls coming from a specific number if it's making to many calls, but we are going to yell and scream when Telco's block calls to a specific number?

          Seems like a bit of a double standard to me.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Ajax 4Hire, May 4th, 2007 @ 1:58pm

          Re: huh? I agree, how is this Verizon's fault

          It would not have been hard for Verizon to do, and if for some reason it IS hard for them to do, ...
          Just because it is easy for Verizon to do, does not mean they should do it. How do you discriminate against calls?
          No, Verizon is not in the police business.
          Verizon is also not in the blocking calls business.

          This is not a Verizon vulnerability.
          This is a vulnerability of the phone system.
          The ability to call a number every 0.83 seconds is not limited to Verizon.

          Quit blaming Verizon for the fault of others.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    me, May 4th, 2007 @ 12:19pm

    what can Verizon Do?

    What can Verizon do from their end? It's not their fault that courts aren't strict enough to make an example of telemarketers. and companies aren't vulnerable because they choose to be, it's because the governemnet or FCC doesn't set the proper rules to help the carriers.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 4th, 2007 @ 12:24pm

    Voicemail back door...

    How about someone lobbying against telemarketers using voicemail back doors? I just got a voicemail the other day, no ring, and it was a telemarketer. I'm in the national do not call registry... but some how this is okay because they aren't calling me, I'm somehow calling them?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Charles Griswold, May 4th, 2007 @ 12:28pm

    The Solution to Telemarketing

    If you want to solve the telemarketing problem, just set Bun-bun loose on them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Araemo, May 4th, 2007 @ 1:55pm

      Re: The Solution to Telemarketing

      He works well on tailgaters too.. (My SO gave me a plush bun-bun years ago, it's sitting in my car's back window scaring off tailgaters. ;) )

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Amy Alkon, May 5th, 2007 @ 11:53am

    Go After Telemarketers

    People need to start going after these scumwads so it'll no longer be lucrative as a business practice. Check out killthecalls.com -- a site built by guy from Sacramento named André-Tascha Lammé who started getting slammed with mortgage telemarketing calls and has been going after telemarketers in court, and quite successfully. He helps a lot of people sue telemarketers in their own states and has helped me in a suit I'm now about to bring against one of these creeps.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dosquatch, May 7th, 2007 @ 8:03am

    Consistency, please

    After all of the bumble and fuss about telcos blocking calls, doesn't it seem a little talking out of the other side of your mouth ish to then suggest that the answer is not legislation, but telcos taking independent action against undesired calls?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    JNels, May 7th, 2007 @ 8:37am

    From Verizon Wireless guy . . .

    Smoke and mirrors? Hardly. We know that by going after telemarketers in a public way, we open the curtain, acknowledging that some of these folks ARE getting through to our customers. And when we've won cases against them, when there have been financial settlements, those proceeds have been designated to organizations that work to prevent domestic violence or educate about D.V.

    First and foremost, we're trying to protect our relationship with our customers. They get unwanted calls from telemarketers, and the first place they report it often isn't a state regulator or the FCC or another federal body . . . it's the wireless service company.

    Jeffrey Nelson

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Jo Kremsreiter, Dec 24th, 2007 @ 8:30am

    Cell Carriers failing grade for technology

    Why is it that in 2007 that cell providers do not offer call blocking? With the technology avaliable today this is something I expect. I should be able to block any number I program in to my phone, and also be able to download a list of numbers from annoying callers. Telemarketers should be required to have some kind of unique identifier so that anyone can choose to have these calles blocked. I would also like to have a feature that requires a caller to hit a certian button stating they meek my qualifications to accept a cell - kinda like a greeting that says "please dial 1 to certify you are not an ahole" and then non aholes will be connected to your number. We are way to technoligcallt advanced to not have this stuff!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This