ISP Information:
One or more connected web pages under a common ownership or management or theme.
ISP Glossary:
web site - Stanley settled back into the couch, and Mark J Cuccia said to him: But if the second case is true, regarding the slimy telemarketers ... right now, if I'm not mistaken, telemarketers are prohibited by law from calling "known" wireless numbers, usually baed on c.o.code prefix (NPA-NXX), or sometimes down to the "thousdans" level, the NPA-NXX-'T' part of the ten-digit number (NPA-NXX-Txxx). Telcordia-TRA sells a product (a *subset* of the LERG) which identifies wireless numbering ranges, specifically intended for telemarketers, so that they can identify only those NPA-NXX-(T) ranges as wireless so as "not to call numbers starting off that way". But if at some point, wireless and landline numbers become "inter-portable" (which they will at some point, either now in November, or some time in the future), then telemarketers won't be able to identify wireless numbers "up front". They "could" still (in theory) be held liable for placing calls *to* cellular phones even though they might not "know" in advance that the number *is* cellular. Conversely, if I have a landline-based phone that was ported from wireless, I might be "blessed" with not getting *any* (or at least "fewer") harrassing calls from telemarketers because they don't "know" that this number is now really a landline! :)Oh, this is *so* much better a reason why WLNP is bad ... And also, even with being able to port wireless numbers amongs wireless providers (whether or not this will initially be consolidated with existing landline number porting), it still isn't going to be easy and perfect when one does want to port. Don't many cellular telcos require that your handset/wireless device be one "approved by them" (i.e., purchased from them)? Some of this non-compatability has to do with the type of wireless service technology in use by that company (GSM, TDMA, CDMA, etc). But even with compatable technology, some wireless providers still *demand* (require) that your mobile phone be "approved" by them. They can "lock out" your use of their network from your phone (that you now "own" but acquired under a different provider previously) so that you "have" to now get *another* phone (at cost) from *them*.Yeah, and WLNP ain't gonna solve *that* problem -- you can bring thenumber, but not the handset. IMO, *THIS* type of anti-competitive / monopolisitc practice *AS WELL* should be addressed by the FCC/FTC/DOJ/Congress/etc. I can understand phones that are not capable of switching between different technologies where if your phone is analog only, or TDMA-only, and your new wireless provider is GSM-only, you'll have to get a new GSM-type phone. But if you *have* an existing phone (from someone else) that *IS* capable of working on that new provider's network/technology, then there should be *NO* reason for them to require/demand that you get yet *another* cellular handset/phone!It's a firmware issue. Think ISDN BRI. :-) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about in cases like mine where my home phone is 'delay call forwarded' (after three or four rings) to my cellular phone. I suppose after three or four rings when the caller hears the slightest pause in the ringing while the call is taken away from my landline number and handed over to my cell phone am intelligent person would realize he was being transferred to some other number. But whoever accused telemarketers of having any brains? PAT]Yeah, but this one's your responsibility, not the telemarketers. Thisis precisely the reason why I *hate* caller pays cellular, and hope itnever flies in the US.Cheers,Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.comMember of the Technical Staff BaylinkThe Suncoast Freenet The Things I ThinkTampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274God, unlike Anya, is fond of bunnies. -- Chelsea Christenson
|
