The U.S. DMA is currently bringing suit in Federal Court (in Oklahoma if I remember correctly) alleging that this legislation is unconstitutional on various grounds. Anyone marketing into the the U.S. should track the results of this lawsuit.
Mr. Sreekumar is not *completely* accurate on the costs involved in subscribing to the various state DNC lists-- the costs vary greatly from state to state, and many are a function of the number of people you will have calling into a state (this is prohibitive for outbound ops that compete on low cost bases, with large numbers of reps).
On an even more frustrating note, the DNC laws themselves are discriminatory on their face-- you have blanket bans on some kinds of calls to DNC listed numbers, while other kinds of calls (calls that DNC listed households are going to be just as hostile to) are 'fair game'. Why should banks be able to sell financial products over the phone, and newspapers sell subscriptions, while a cookware company cannot hire some 100 seat outbound center to peddle the same products being sold on TV via infomercials?
There is no good reason for this. Basically, some industries have influential state lobbyists, and some don't.
The registration requirements are definitely designed with U.S. operations in mind, and will predictably only get worse for offshore and nearshore operations to comply with.
That said, a National DNC list would be preferable to what currently exists: a state-by-state patchwork quilt of DNC lists, "black dot" statutes etc. on various models, with varying penalties, incorporating licensing schemes or not, etc. In other words, an expensive compliance mess. But in the end, our industry won't get that: what we'll wind up with is the worst of both worlds.
What is gradually evolving in the U.S. regulatory situation is something not entirely unlike the U.S. securities laws. A state-by-state patchwork of un-harmonized laws, AND a draconian Federal-level statute, all of which have to be complied with-- at risk of suit from aggressive U.S. regulators that bring prosecutions on a "looks like it might violate" basis.
The *really* frustrating element of all this is that it's likely to drive a segment of our industry "underground". If there was reasonable, well-designed legislation that was easy and inexpensive to comply with, and protected consumers while assisting industry, only a tiny minority would not comply. With expensive, cumbersome, arcane legislation, offshore operations in particular are going to ask themselves, why bother complying? The ability of the U.S. or state governments to chase down all the offshore operations is very limited. So 'above board' operations will have their reputations damaged by the "underground" operations, and have to compete with businesses that do not have to pay the cost of compliance. U.S. taxpayers will foot the bill for an expensive and futile campaign to chase down the offshore "underground" operations.
Who wins?
And Mr. Patel-- if your product can "weed out" DNC numbers on a same-day-as-registered basis, we'd be interested.
|