Sam Spade wrote:
>> The FCC never took jurisdiction over name identification.
>> Should they?
> Is that you Sam?-) What exactly would the FCC "enforce" if they took
> over name id? All the "unavailable" calls I get do not even show the > phone number!
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What they could enforce, if they
> wished to go to the trouble, would be to insist that all telephone
> calls for which name/number delivery was technically possible were
> required to give that same information. No more playing around with
> it, as telemarketers are inclined to do. PAT]
I suspect from the way current VoIP calls are structured that it would be (a) very easy to spoof the number, (b) impossible to enforce upon overseas numbers and (c) too easy to make the number unavailable in the first place. Heck, even the doctor's office number is "unavailble".
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We cannot do anything about international phone calls short of some kind of enforceable treaty between nations. But the doctor's office number would not be unavailable if there was a law with strong teeth in it saying the correct number had to be given out when available. I do know that in my own situation, since about a year ago when I had 'reject anonymous calls' (*77) added to my features here, my phone has rung a lot less than before. All that 'reject anonymous calls' does is if the caller uses *67 when dialing my number (or has his line set up to go anonymous) his call does not get through here. I do not think I have missed any calls I felt like receiving anyway. PAT]