Nickel and Dime

• 

Nickel and Dime (Actually just the nickel, the dime gets dropped later)

Overview of Three Part Solution - Very Short Version:

Part 1: The Rule (1 year to compliance)

Outbound calls, with only tracked exceptions/exemptions, must have a valid outbound caller id registered with the Carrier/Telco.

Part 2: The Nickel (Ok, this also a rule, it is the penalty for Part1 …)

Outbound calls that are not registered/tracked exceptions but do not have a valid and registered caller id will cost one nickel to initiate. Any Rule without a Penalty is not really a rule (it’s more of a Guideline, right?)

Part 3: The Software

Registered Call IDs will be made available to the FCC by each telco for tracking the initiator of these calls. Privacy concerns: Still requires a subpoena, but this will at least show the FCC upon which telco to issue said subpoena and the telco will, without exception, be able to identify the customer in question.

In Depth Description

Part 1: The Rule (1 year to compliance)

Each client of each telco must maintain at the telco a list of applicable callerids from which they will dial. This rule applies to “final leg” only. Telcos do not need to present these lists to other telcos, this is for the Customer/Telco relationship only. Each telco that sells direct to the public must maintain said list for each public client and make said list available to the FCC. This could be in the fashion of a direct request to the appropriate database by the FCC at any time or by an automated response to a request for a specific number. But: This must not involve a human which would both delay the response and insert the likelihood of human error. So either direct database request, website response or automated email response. Each method would be acceptable and the software necessary to provide a reply is easily created. It is also quite possible to limit the “request/response” to the FCC only so noone else can even attempt to access this data.

The data would not include anything personally identifiable (such as a company name or SSN or anything else). The only information that could be obtained would be the Caller ID and quantity of calls from each Caller ID on each day. Record retention/availability would likely be capped at one year. Internally (not available to the FCC during standard searches), this information would be linked to a specific customer and the internal information would only be available upon subpoena issuance. This data exchange is merely in place to allow ease of identification of the telco upon which to serve the subpoena.

Exemptions: Any client requiring legal exemption to using a valid CallerID may file a legal exception request (to be designed by the fcc). Such exemptions should always be granted for organizations with less than 10 outbound channels (or less than 1 call per second up to 100 channels) and each such organization must be unique by definition as a separate customer with a separate payment account and connection to the carrier. Specific exemption example: for situations such as spousal abuse retreats (which would probably not need more than 1 call per second anyway ....).

Exceptions would not be made for political calls, which should still have a callerid associated with them to allow customers to request removal from their calling lists. (unless there is an overriding law allowing anonymous calls, otherwise telemarketers would merely claim policitical and stay under the radar, completely defeating the purpose of this system).

Part 2: The Nickel

Any NonExcepted client with more than 10 outbound channels or 1 call per second MUST be charged 5 cents per call for non-valid or non-registered-CID calls (regardless of "connection" of said call, the charge applies even if the call does not connect). The Telco must charge this fee, and may not rebate or exchange or remit" or otherwise find any way to give this money back to said client or to anyone else. This is not a fee to pass to the FCC in all circumstances, but is required to be charged and WILL be paid to the FCC in some circumstances.

This means a quick "no callerid call" or “unregistered callerid call” will cost a nickel to start ... but 100k such calls will cost a small fortune. So exceptions to the rule are fairly inexpensive, but robocalling will simply not be viable. however: any client who uses this feature "excessively" must be reported to the FCC, and charged. Any fines due to the general public should be paid from the 5 cents per call charged until that amount is reduced to what the calls would normally have been billed at (less reasonable fees to the carrier to manage this particular "incident").

For instance: If a client spends $25k in a week by spending 5 cents on thousands of non-CallerID-registered call, and those calls actually should only have cost only $2k, the remaining $23k will be used for Fine purposes less a reasonable management fee ($1k) for the carrier. This management fee is meant to compensate the carrier for management of this “case” to avoid penalizing the carrier for following these rules. The nickel fees collected from the Customer above the regular retail cost of the calls and the management fee will be provided to the FCC to cover any unpaid fines which the FCC initiates against the Customer (often $500 per complainant to the FCC) to protect the general public against the Disappearing Customer. If any telco fails to collect “The Nickel”, the records must be checked and the telco will have to pay as if they had collected the nickel properly. This will discourage Telco’s from offering credit to companies who are performing robodials and not cutting them off immediately when they begin the robodial activity.

Part 3: The Software

AFTER the above two rules are in place: the registration of robocall reported numbers can begin (by those with the software installed). There are any number of software packages available that can and will be implemented. This software cannot work until the calling parties are required to use valid caller IDs as the software all relies on the caller id to “deduce” the nature of the call.

The software in question would be capable of operating at the Federal level, Telco Association level (ie: all telcos at once!), smaller groups of Telcos or individual Telcos. It can also operate at the consumer level and at companies specifically selling just robodial opt-out software. The amount of sharing of “Robodial” or “Telemarketer” or other identification levels of CallerIDs can be managed ONLY when the CallerIDs can be relied upon to be accurate and location of the original caller can be accomplished through the above two rules.

It would be a good rule to require that any “mark these calls bad” software categorize them according to several categories, not merely “bad”. IE: It must be possible to mark calls as Telemarketing/Political/Charity etc. to avoid plopping all caller IDs in one pool. This would allow the final consumer of each of these applications to specficially opt-out of ALL automated calls, or only Telemarketing, or only Political calls.

It may also be a good requirement that any solution be capable of modifying the “mark list” to meet new FCC rules in the future (when a new category is identified, the software must be upgradeable to include said new category during identification of the call and during Opt-Out with the consumers later using the data).

1) Does it work? (weighted at 50%)

In the first phase (rule implementation), the offenders will be easily identified, thus allowing prosecution and the money collected while offending will still be available after the offender disappears which will mean the disappearing offenders will pay for their offenses which is certainly not the case now.

In the second phase (software implementation), the newly available information would be able to protect all phone types in all NANPA markets. Implementation by more consumers, and software availability across major providers will allow broader coverage.

At present, I build and sell telephone servers for call centers. This solution will work.

Robocallers could get around this, but the infrastructure necessary to do so will be beyond even the most sophisticated and will cost more to implement than they will likely gain in doing so. For instance: they could acquire a physical location with 50 physical phones lines (no rules limiting callerid-free calls) and use that until the telco realizes they are robodialing and cuts them off for violating the Fair Use clause in their contracts (they can and do use this method already, but VOIP allows a much easier path to accomplish the task). There are other scenarios, but they are all equally risky and involve investment in time any money … which is not something the average robocaller has interest in. They want to invest almost nothing and make a large quantity of cash through hard-line sales in a few weeks and then move on. Acquiring a location and/or LOTS of tiny phone accounts requires a serious investment of time, energy and money and when it all disappears they have to start over and reinvest again, and the individual Telcos are already policing this to avoid the losses inherent in robodialing on “unlimited” local accounts.

2) Is it easy to use? (weighted at 25%)

Implementation will be slow, but not in any way beyond the technical expertise of any existing Telco. Ease, however, is a subjective term. For a more direct answer: Easy, yes. Immediate: no.

3) Can it be rolled out? (weighted at 25%)

It will require changes, but not to the switching systems. No additional information is required during the call. But at the initiation point of the call, there will be billing rules added for major clients (only those with more than 1 call per second or 10 channels which excludes every residential line in the world from any needed change).

Adaptation for the consumer is easy: Provide a list of CallerIDs that you will use before you use them. Adaptation for the 1st level Telco is also easy, but will require implementation: Provide a website app for your clients to provide those callerIDs. Follow this up with a billing system that invoices the Nickel for non-registered calls. As most telcos already have a website, that portion of the add-on is a mere technical detail. The billing software upgrade requires yet another technical upgrade but no changes to the existing infrastructure. This will have no effect for billing of Cell Phones or home phones and most small businesses, as they fall below the “1 call per second/10 max channels” limits.

I do not know if the Telcos would embrace or battle this proposal. On one hand, they would quite possibly be rid of the robodialers forever. On the other hand they Make Money from Robodialers! Not to mention that no technology based company likes it when their software changes (as there are always complications to upgrades, even if the software in question is just billing software).

Speed of implementation is related to … the government speed in passing and codifying a new set of rules without political exceptions “breaking” the entire system. So I’ll say this again: NO exceptions for any facility dialing more than 1 call per second or 10 total channels. Especially political calls. LOL