The FTC has a telemarketing sales rule which requires do not call telemarketer compliance
The Federal Trade Commission protects consumers not telemarketing companies
National Do Not Call Registry and List Compliance News

This newsletter (or material) is prepared by Copilevitz and Canter, LLC, (816) 472-9000,, Copilevitz and Canter, LLC, does not provide legal services to Do Not Call Compliance or and does not endorse our website or services. This information is not to be used as a substitute for legal counsel.
2022 Newsletters
2021 Newsletters
2020 Newsletters
2019 Newsletters
2018 Newsletters
2017 Newsletters
2016 Newsletters
2015 Newsletters
2014 Newsletters
2013 Newsletters
2012 Newsletters
2011 Newsletters
2010 Newsletters
2009 Newsletters
2008 Newsletters
2007 Newsletters
2006 Newsletters
2005 Newsletters
2004 Newsletters
State Do Not Call

July 2018 - Call Compliance News


Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has announced “Operation Donate with Honor”, a series of cases brought against allegedly fraudulent charities raising money purportedly for veterans and service members.  See  Many states have filed related actions.


California approved the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (AB 375) which will give consumers the right to request that businesses disclose the categories and specific personal information they collect about consumers, the purpose for collecting the data, and the categories of third parties with which the information may be shared.  This law is effective January 1, 2020 and will also allow consumers to opt out of the sale of their information.

A California court has issued a show cause order against Anton Ewing, a noted Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) pro se plaintiff.  Ewing v. K2 Prop Development, LLC.  Ewing accused defense counsel of criminal deceit and requested a protective order against her prohibiting her from communicating via e-mail.  Ewing’s motion to contempt was, in part, based on defense counsel sending settlement terms to an email Ewing provided her to be notified in the event of settlement.

Comment: Ewing was ordered to pay $2,214 in sanctions to defendant and show cause as to why additional sanctions should not be levied.

A California court has awarded a TCPA plaintiff $106,000 in a default judgment based on 43 telephone calls.  Most notably, the court interpreted the terms “willfully” or “knowingly” to include intentional acts, not just acts which knowingly or intentionally violate the law.


Florida has begun requesting extensive information including scripts, telephone numbers, corporate filing documents, and manager information for entities filing an affidavit of exemption.  The regulation provides that “at the request of the department, the commercial telephone solicitor shall provide sales scripts, contracts, and other documentation as needed to verify the validity of the exemption before the affidavit of exemption is accepted for filing”.

Comment: The above language does not give the state the ability to request a “mini” registration.  Please contact me if you would like to discuss a limited informational letter to obtain a Florida affidavit of exemption.


An Illinois court has dismissed a claim brought against Sirius XM Radio and its telephone vendors alleging they used an automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) to call plaintiff’s cell phone without his prior express consent.  Pinkus v. Sirius XM Radio, et al.  The judge relied on ACA Int’l v. FCC to hold that the Federal Communication Commission’s “(FCC”) definition of the term “capacity” to dial without human intervention was invalid and that the statutory definition limited the term to dialing random or sequential numbers.

Comment: If the dialing system does not have the capacity to generate numbers randomly or sequentially, it is not an ATDS under this court ruling.


An Ohio court has dismissed a case brought against a law firm based on two texts it sent to accident victims soliciting services.  The court ruled that the complaint did not allege the texts were sent using an ATDS and therefore dismissed the case.  Lord v. Kisling.

The authors make every attempt to provide current, accurate information, but Telemarketing ConnectionS® is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel, and readers should not use it in lieu of obtaining knowledgeable legal, or other professional, counsel expert in the field of commercial telemarketing law. References in Telemarketing ConnectionS® do not constitute endorsement by Copilevitz & Canter, L.L.C. or Telemarketing ConnectionS®. January 1, 2005, Copilevitz & Canter, L.L.C.
  Telemarketing Do Not Call Compliance - Avoid large fines by staying compliant.   NDNCR and SDNCR - National Do Not Call Registry and State Do Not Call Registry - Know the difference.
The Do Not Call Compliance Silver Plan offers an Automated federal and state do not call compliance solution. Scrub your list yourself using our automated list scrubbing system.
Telemarketing companies are required to enroll in the Federal Do Not Call Registry.
Do Not Call has the robust software technology and computer power to properly remove (scrub) the Do Not Call numbers from your telemarketing lists.
The National Do Not Call Registry is a list of phone numbers from consumers who have indicated their preference to limit the telemarketing calls they receive.
This Site is designed for use with MSIE 7+,FF 3.5+, Chrome, Opera and other modern browsers.
A Broadband Internet Connection is recommended for uploading and downloading files.

Terms of Use | User Agreement | Privacy and Security Policy

© Copyright 2003-2023 Do Not Call Compliance - Telemarketing Do Not Call List Compliance Service.
All Rights Reserved. Information on this site is not to be used as a substitute for legal counsel.

Do Not Call Compliance | | 800-930-7252