You are not my lawyer, I am not requesting legal advice, etc.
Let’s say, hypothetically, that I have a friend who is being repeatedly called by those a*holes at Credit Account Services (it’s farking Anne this time, not Heather). Yes, this friend has requested to be put on the Do Not Call list, and in fact has been there for some time. Credit Account Services pays no attention to this. Yes, my friend has even reported them to the district attorney in the relevant state.
To no avail. Repeated calls, no matter what.
So, both to relieve his tortured feelings, and to do his bit to make the world a Better Place by driving telemarketers out of it, my friend has hit on the notion of being as verbally abusive as possible to whoever answers the phone after the robo-dialer connects. Very abusive - think of a nasty Pit rant delivered in person.
I was wondering if my friend were violating any law, or incurring any civil risk, from this entertaining but ultimately futile conduct? No threats of violence are made, apart from the implied damage that would be incurred should the telemarketer attempt many of the suggested acts. Nor have any of the insults been racist in nature. Mostly observations on their personal habits, background, the employment of their mothers, the circumstances of their birth, and recommended courses of action.
I am not asking if my friend can be sued - obviously anyone can be sued, even for frivolous reasons like hoping a telemarketer suffocates whilst performing cunnilingus on a dead walrus. I was merely wondering if there were any reason to believe that such a suit had any merit.
Discussions to date have only come up with one suggestion.
The scenario is
[ul][li]Phone goes ringy-ringy.[/li][li]Friend picks up.[/li][li]Chirpy voice-acting school drop out gives the canned lies about reducing credit card rates, and says to press 1 to speak to an operator. [/li][li]After pressing 1, the fun and abuse begin, and continues without pause until said operator gets tired of it and hangs up.[/li][li]Lather, rinse, repeat (unfortunately).[/ul][/li]
The suggestion is that, by pressing 1, in some sense the recipient of the call is consenting to the call, and therefore has some duty not to make it an occasion to remark that the mother of the operator had called during a break from her employment fellating dogs in a Tijuana sex show to say that she was ashamed of the career the operator had chosen.
I find it hard to believe that anyone is consenting to a call by hitting the button to opt out, especially since Credit Account Services obviously cares nothing about the law, but I was wondering if the Great Legal Minds of the Dope had any insights to share.
Mods, of course feel free to move this thread as appropriate.
Regards,
Shodan