Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 145 posts

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#51

Post by strongpigeon »

game-of-throws wrote: post #49
thathndude wrote: post #31

Lawyer here. I do this kind of work for a client. Good for this guy for taking the fight to the spammers. As we head into election season, a lot of us are going to get unsolicited text messages like this. You too can sue for them! Some of what was said in the tweets regarding your rights and what you have to do to file a claim are, in my experience and opinion, not correct. The general idea is right, but some of the…

> As we head into election season, a lot of us are going to get unsolicited text messages like this. You too can sue for them! Can you elaborate? Every source I've seen says that politicians have exempted themselves from the spam laws. e.g. a random google result: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/elections/202... > That's because the National Do Not Call Registry does not apply to political text message…

I saw that as well on the FTC's website [0]. Curious if you can actually prevent them.

[0] https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/national-do-not-call-regis...

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#52

Post by vpribish »

MarkMarine wrote: post #24
throw8383833jj wrote: post #17

I think a much easier way would be if we just taxed phone calls at 1 cent each. I mean absolutely everything else is already taxed: you pay taxes just to stay alive. the least that could be done is add a 1 cent tax to each phone call, just enough to stop the mass phone calling.

These calls are already illegal. There is a Do not call list. The gov has just been completely inept at enforcement, I don’t think we need extra tax, just enforce the laws we have.

clearly the current model doesn't work well enough. US laws don't stop Nigerian scammers abusing weak telecom systems. Adding a tax paid by the carrier incentivises them to collect it from the upstream chain all the way back to the caller.

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#53

Post by perlgeek »

adoxyz wrote: post #12

Winning a lawsuit and actually collecting are two different things, and from my experience the legal system does not care at all once they've issued a judgement. It worked out for that person and that's great, but these types of lawsuits tend to take a while to get a hearing, require a bunch of paperwork, and if the other party does not play ball, the odds of you getting any $$ out of it are pretty slim.

This is fairly sad state of affairs.

Here in Germany if you have a court order and that isn't payed, the bailiff/marshall visit the recalcitrant party and confiscates cash or valuable items until the order is settled. (At least for companies; there are some regulations that individuals cannot be brought below the poverty line by such actions).

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#54

Post by andrewla »

strongpigeon wrote: post #45

Something worth highlighting is that you need to be on the Federal Do Not Call registry for that. https://www.donotcall.gov/

The thread claims that not to be the case [1]:

> 2. Issue a notice of demand explaining that you are seeking payment for TCPA violation and give them 10 days to respond. Send mail with signature delivery. (You can't sue without having issued a notice of demand.) $500 damages, treble if you're on the Do Not Call registry.

[1] https://twitter.com/dweekly/status/1552151905433923585

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#55

Post by [deleted] »

everforward wrote: post #50
andrewljohnson wrote: post #36

To what extent can this be automated? There are apps to fight parking/speeding tickets... could the same be done for little lawsuits to sue spammers? Maybe a lawyer could comment on feasibility of this.

From a technical perspective, I think it would be hard to correctly identify who to sue. Phone numbers can be spoofed, gotten through a 3rd party like Twilio, or come from email to SMS gateways (if those still exist). For texts, you can probably parse out a link they want you to click, but I would expect them to be using a WHOIS guard. Phone calls are even worse, because you'd have to interact with the rep enough to…

[deleted]

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#57

Post by strongpigeon »

andrewla wrote: post #54
strongpigeon wrote: post #45

Something worth highlighting is that you need to be on the Federal Do Not Call registry for that. https://www.donotcall.gov/

The thread claims that not to be the case [1]: > 2. Issue a notice of demand explaining that you are seeking payment for TCPA violation and give them 10 days to respond. Send mail with signature delivery. (You can't sue without having issued a notice of demand.) $500 damages, treble if you're on the Do Not Call registry. [1] https://twitter.com/dweekly/status/1552151905433923585

I'd be curious if OP could chime in about that, since the service they posted claims they don't need you permission if you aren't on the Do Not Call list [0]

> Note: They don’t need your permission if you haven’t put your mobile number on the Federal Do Not Call list, but don’t worry, if you haven’t we tell you how to do that too!

[0] https://www.isipp.com/how-to-make-phone-and-sms-spammers-pay...

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#58

Post by Broken_Hippo »

throw8383833jj wrote: post #17

I think a much easier way would be if we just taxed phone calls at 1 cent each. I mean absolutely everything else is already taxed: you pay taxes just to stay alive. the least that could be done is add a 1 cent tax to each phone call, just enough to stop the mass phone calling.

I mean, great, but that's seriously complicated.

Who pays the tax and how are you going to collect? Do you pay to receive a call? (I know this used to be normal practice in the US, but it isn't where I'm located)? If the call begins or ends in a different country, who pays the tax? Would this make calls unaffordable for poor folks - and what about services like google voice? Are some exempt (like non-emergency hospital, school, and police calls?)

Why wouldn't it just be a charge on your phone bill and included in there?

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#59

Post by flerchin »

aliqot wrote: post #32
flerchin wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, and folks could even have a credit of 500 phone calls a month, or whatever a reasonable number would be, so no cost to consumers at all. Instead of a tax, it should be a minimum charge that goes to the carriers. So that they would be incentivized to collect it.

In a world where we pay for stamps, why didn't bulk unsolicited mail go away? This won't work.

I think you're saying that the cure described is worse than the disease, and that the bureaucracy to maintain such regulation would expand beyond its original mandate.

I think that's assuming that things always go poorly, and that there is no possible way for it to go well. Sometimes things go well.

Re: I won a suit against a party that sent me an unsolicited text message

#60

Post by 300bps »

dweekly wrote: post #48
300bps wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing that I noticed was not 100% correct is: 5. [..] courts will seize from them what you are owed The process to get a court to do this is extremely difficult. It often starts with Debtor Examination followed by filing a bunch of documents to start the seizing process. If the person really doesn’t want to pay the judgement though, good luck. For example, during the Debtor Examination they have to answer tr…

Ah! Yes, my statement was incorrect. I had observed wage garnishment on the other side of the fence as an employer and had assumed courts would do this processing after a default judgement. This turned out to be a wrong assumption.

No problem. Wage garnishment is interesting by the way - some states don’t allow it for judgements like this.

It really makes it almost impossible to collect judgements in those states for a determined debtor.

Post reply on HN