These days no matter where you look there is some type of information technology in your presence. It can be seen while someone is walking, eating lunch in a cafe or even driving on the expressway. Information technology is available at their fingertips. It is amazing that you can reached by a loved one, an employee or employer, a friend and sometimes people you don’t want to reach you e.g. telemarketers from a device either at your desk or even in your hands. Most people own phones, whether cellphones or landline phones, to keep in touch with family or to conduct business be it personal or occupation related. Prior to caller ID, there was a time when someone would answer the phone in surprise because they did not know who was on the other of the phone. Though invented in 1968 by Ted Paraskevakos, caller ID did not become available until July 1984 by BellSouth as a trial.
Caller ID is almost an essential feature with any type of phone. You can determine if you’re going to answer or ignore a call simply by viewing the number on the screen. Even with calling features, telemarketers still manage to get through. What were the advances in information technology that resulted in new ethical issues necessitating the creation of each act?
The interesting comparison of The Consumer Protection Act of 1991 and the Do No Call Implementation Act of 2003 is though these are two different laws, they go hand-in-hand in regard to what they mean as well as what they stand for.
The Essay on Cellular Phone Home Time Call
Recently I realized I was home less and less and had begun to miss numerous phone calls. I had been debating for months as to whether or not I should get a cellular phone. With much consideration I figured it was high time I broadened my horizons in respect to contemporary technology. I caved and joined the twenty-first century by purchasing my first cellular phone. I found that cellular service ...
The purpose of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, that was passed in 1991, which amended the 1934 Communications Act, was to protect the rights of consumers from telemarketers, who at ti What were the advances in information technology that resulted in new ethical issues necessitating the creation of each act?
These days no matter where you look there is some type of information technology in your presence. It can be seen while someone is walking, eating lunch in a café or even driving on the expressway. Information technology is available at their fingertips. It is amazing that you can reached by a loved one, an employee or employer, a friend and sometimes people you don’t want to reach you e.g. telemarketers from a device either at your desk or even in your hands. Most people own phones, whether cellphones or landline phones, to keep in touch with family or to conduct business be it personal or occupation related. Prior to caller ID, there was a time when someone would answer the phone in surprise because they did not know who was on the other of the phone. Though invented in 1968 by Ted Paraskevakos, caller ID did not become available until July 1984 by BellSouth as a trial. Caller ID is almost an essential feature with any type of phone. You can determine if you’re going to answer or ignore a call simply by viewing the number on the screen. Even with calling features, telemarketers still manage to get through. What were the advances in information technology that resulted in new ethical issues necessitating the creation of each act?
The interesting comparison of The Consumer Protection Act of 1991 and the Do Not Call Implementation Act of 2003 is though these are two different laws, they go hand in hand in regard to what they mean as well as what they stand for.
The purpose of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, that was passed in 1991, which amended the 1934 Communications Act, was to protect the rights of consumers from telemarketers, who at times could be aggressive or
abusive. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act referred to as the (TCPA) is codified as 47 U.S.C. 227 the TCPA restricts the use of automated equipment (telephone) and telephone solicitations. It also limits the use of auto dialers, prerecorded voice messages (robocalls), artificial voices, fax machines and text messages regardless if it’s to a person or an emergency line (e.g. 911), a hospital emergency line, a cell phone, a physician’s office, any type of healthcare facility or any service for which the recipient is charged for the call. If a fax machine, auto dialer or messaging service is used, identification and contact information of the caller/entity must be revealed.
The Report on Benefits of Using Cell Phone While Driving
The weight of the scientific evidence to date suggests that use of a cellular phone while driving does create safety risks for the driver and his/her passengers as well as other road users. The magnitude of these risks is uncertain but appears to be relatively low in probability compared to other risks in daily life. It is not clear whether hands-free cellular phone designs are significantly safer ...
TCPA and FCC also prohibit, unless prior consent was given by the recipient; solicitors from calling residences prior to 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. If any violations took place, the solicitor could be sued for up to $1500 for each of their violations or for monetary losses, whichever was greater. Also prohibited was unsolicited advertising faxes. TCPA and FCC required solicitors to maintain a do-not-call list of consumers who do not want to be called: requests are 5 years but as of 2007 (Do Not Call Improvement Act) it is permanent. Solicitors must honor the National Do Not Call Registry.
Because of the TCPA a database was needed to collect information in regard to documenting what consumers did not want to be bombarded with calls to their homes by telemarketers. Congress then suggested that regulations of the Do Not Call Act by the FCC needed the establishment and operation of a single database. However, each company was required to maintain their own do-not-call list. This proved ineffective because consumers were required to call every telemarketer. Because this also proved ineffective, the Federal Trade Commission, also known as the (FTC) then established the National Do Not Call Registry in 2003. The commercial telemarketers were then prohibited from making unsolicited calls to anyone that didn’t want them. The National Do Not Call Registry was challenged by the telemarketing industry, however the Do Not Call Implementation Act was passed to allow the FTC to establish fees sufficient to implement and enforce provisions related to the Do Not Call Registry.
Because of technology, there are always going to be loopholes in the system.
Some telemarketers were so skilled that they would request call backs to customers in an attempt to go around the Do Not Call system or by using spoof caller ID which are both still unlawful. Unlawful and unethical to say the least. Each time the system is compromised, a new law takes place. In 2007 the Do Not Call Improvement Act H.R. Bill 3541 was signed into law. One new provision was consumers only needed to sign up once for their numbers to be maintained on the Do Not Call Registry. The FTC was also required to purge disconnected and reassigned numbers several times during the month. Though purging numbers several times per month is effective, nothing is 100%. Telemarketers are in business to sell a product or products, and by any means necessary they will find a way.
The Term Paper on Cases of Indian Contract Act 1872
The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company made a product called the “smoke ball”. It claimed to be a cure for influenza and a number of other diseases, in the context of the1889-1890 flu pandemic (estimated to have killed 1 million people). The smoke ball was a rubber ball with a tube attached. It was filled with carbolic acid (or phenol). The tube would be inserted into a user’s nose and ...
