Well on Wednesday a Court in Massachusetts gave us a fourth ruling applying Facebook but only on the narrow issue of whether a text is still a call. In Barton v. Wellness, the court held, in essence, that Facebook did not move the needle.
Friday, April 16, 2021
Facebook Auto-Dialer Ruling
A bipartisan, bicameral group of lawmakers from the House Energy and Commerce Committee, including Chairman Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Communications Subcommittee Ranking Member Sen. John Thune (R-SD), jointly responded to the Supreme Court’s
Facebook v. Duguid ruling saying that they will be “closely following the impact of the Court’s decision on consumers.” As we explained previously, in the
Facebook ruling, the Supreme Court held that under the TCPA’s definition of an autodialer, a device must use a random or sequential number generator in all cases whether storing or dialing telephone numbers. In their statement, the group expressed concerns that “[t]he Supreme Court’s ruling . . . may allow scammers to send out a barrage of texts or calls without fear of reprisal or consequence. . . . We know the last thing Americans need right now is an onslaught of texts or calls from scammers trying t
Alerts
A woman wearing a face mask to protect against the coronavirus disease uses her smartphone walking on a street in Moscow on March 19, 2021.
Photo: Yuri Kadobnov (Getty Images)
Rather than dole out what is, essentially at least to one of the richest companies on the planet a handful of spare change, Facebook set out to purposely undermine one of the most important legal protections Americans have against unwanted robocalls. Today it accomplished that mission.
Advertisement
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday issued an opinion that negates decades of work by Congress to shield Americans from the plague of automated phone calls. Specifically, the court chose to accept a narrow view of what constitutes an “autodialer,” also known as an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS), under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The court’s interpretation effectively limits that definition to only systems that target sequentially or randomly dialed numbers.
Legal Disclaimer
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
jdsupra.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from jdsupra.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.