Text: Small Text  Normal Text  Large Text  Larger Text

Blog Archive

PrevPrevApril 2014NextNext
SMTWTFS
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930

Canada's Do-Not-Call Disaster

PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Monday February 02, 2009
Appeared in the Toronto Star on February 2, 2009 as Tough Action Can Reverse Do-Not-Call Disaster

When Canada's do-not-call list was launched last September, two outcomes were easy to predict.  The first was that the list would prove enormously popular with millions of phone numbers registered in a matter of months.  The second was that Canadians would ultimately be left disappointed with little reduction in unwanted telemarketing calls and concerns about the ability of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications to enforce the law.

Four months later, the do-not-call list contains roughly six million registered phone numbers and, as expected, there are a growing number of Canadians - including Industry Minister Tony Clement - who are expressing misgivings about the potential for abuse.

The problems associated with the do-not-call list fall into three categories.  The first, which was readily apparent years before the list became operational, is that there are far too many exceptions that allow for the majority of telemarketing calls to continue unhindered.  With exceptions for survey companies, political parties, charities, newspapers, and businesses with a prior relationship, some estimate that 80 percent of telemarketing calls are not covered by the do-not-call legislation.

The second problem revolves around the technical structure of the do-not-call list.  As has been well reported, the list - all six million numbers - is available to any telemarketer.  With numerous reports of abuse, the danger of making the numbers available to the very organizations precluded from calling those same numbers is now readily apparent.

The third problem is tied to enforcement.  The do-not-call legislation includes provisions for significant penalties, but it falls to the CRTC to investigate complaints and pursue penalties.  There have been many complaints filed with the CRTC, but to date, no penalties.

Some of the enforcement problems are linked to jurisdiction - the CRTC's jurisdictional mandate ends at the border and its ability to levy penalties against an out-of-country organization is very limited - but there is also mounting evidence that Canadian companies are disregarding the CRTC's own rulings and effectively daring the Commission to bring actions.

For example, last summer the CRTC ruled that do-not-call requests registered through third party services such as iOptOut.ca (a site I founded) were valid and should be honoured.  IOptout.ca has generated nearly 8 million opt-out requests, however, there have been several online reports that blue chip companies such as Bell Canada and the Bank of Nova Scotia are refusing to accept the opt-out requests in direct contravention of the CRTC ruling.

With many more do-not-call registrations likely on the way and Clement vowing to take action, can the do-not-call list be saved?

The short answer is yes, though reversing the do-not-call disaster will require action from both the government and the CRTC.  The government should start by paring back the current overbroad exceptions.  A do-not-call list that exempts the majority of telemarketing calls is bound to disappoint and the only way to address that issue is to return to the bill as it was originally presented in the House of Commons without exceptions.

Further, Clement should open talks with the United States to address some of the jurisdictional limitations of the do-not-call list.  Given that the U.S. faces some of the same concerns, a mutual recognition approach that would establish a North America-wide do-not-call list is a logical next step.

Meanwhile, the CRTC must also step up to the plate.  It bears responsibility for enforcing the law and it needs to send a strong signal that it is fully prepared to investigate complaints and to levy tough penalties for non-compliance.  In that regard, the Commission should target high profile organizations to send the message that no one is above the law.

Given its remarkable popularity, doing away with the do-not-call list is not option.  The government bought it, then broke it, and now it must fix it.

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.

Comments (2)add comment

Joe Mama said:

Do-Not-Answer list
Everyone should just employ their own "Do-Not-Answer List". I've been doing so for years, and I haven't talked to a telemarketer since! It's a very simple solution. Call display is available just about everywhere, and in a lot of cases it's included free of charge with phone service. When the phone rings, look at the number. If it's a long-distance number an/or one you don't recognize, then don't answer. There, done. No million dollar bureaucracy required!
February 09, 2009

Slick said:

Do-Not-Answer list is no cheap solution
Joe Mama, you're wrong. There is a "million dollar bureaucracy" required for "Do-Not-Answer"-ing--it's the one run by the phone company. Oh, and the price tag is even bigger. There are 6 million people on the Do Not Call List. Call display costs more than a dollar a month. If all of these people switched to call display it would be more than a 6 million dollar bureaucracy per month. Plus, on the do-not-answer method, you can't receive calls from people you don't know and that are not telemarketers. Hardly a good deal.
September 10, 2010

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
Tags:
, , ,
Share: Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterEmailPrintPDF
Related Items: