united-states telemarketing phone
Do US landline carriers have safe harbor for carrying illegal calls?
<p>I am curious to know if US landline carriers have safe harbor for carrying illegal calls? That is, are the carriers somehow immune from an action when they carry illegal calls on their network?</p>

<p>The changing tide and specific details are (1) carriers are accepting and completing calls from known robocallers and other miscreants, and (2) the FTC's 2017 ruling that carriers can block the traffic at the network level.</p>

<p>The insight for (1) is, carriers have available lists of some robocallers and other miscreants. Two lists are (a) the <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/open-government/data-sets/do-not-call-data" rel="nofollow noreferrer">FTC Do Not Call</a> data files, and (b) reports of harassing calls from some robocallers and other miscreants via Unlawful Call Centers (i.e., *57).</p>

<p>The change for (2) is from the FTC. It is Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, CG Docket No. 17-59, published in FCC-CIRC1703-01. Specifically (D)(8) states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>To aid the Strike Force and other providers’ call blocking efforts,
  the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau) released a
  Public Notice on September 30, 2016 clarifying that voice service
  providers may block calls using a spoofed Caller ID number if the
  number’s subscriber requests that they do so.[26] The 2016 Guidance PN
  built on the Commission’s earlier clarification,[27] which, among
  other things, clarified that nothing in the Communications Act
  prohibits voice service providers from offering call blocking tools to
  those consumers who request such services.[28] Following from that
  initial guidance, the Strike Force Report sought additional
  clarification regarding the permissibility of certain
  provider-initiated call blocking.[29] Specifically, it sought
  clarification that 1) providers may block calls where the Caller ID
  shows an unassigned number, and 2) providers may block calls that the
  provider has determined to be illegal robocalls, so long as the
  provider takes reasonable steps to confirm that the calls are illegal.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And to state the obvious, some of the robocalls violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009. Additionally, if the inbound call is carried over a person's or business' VoIP or computer network, then it could violate Computer Fraud and Abuse Act also.</p>

<p>And I am also aware of the <a href="https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying" rel="nofollow noreferrer">illegal spying campaign carried out with the US government</a>. However, it literally took an act of congress to let the carriers off the hook for that illegal activity.</p>

<p>Yes.  As a utility, telephone carriers (both landline and cell carriers) are immune from unlawful communications crossing over their networks.  The responsibility of any illicit form of speech (such that there is in the United States.  The most common is falsely calling 911 (true threat doctrine)), though I'm sure someone somewhere has discussed criminal actions over the phone as well.</p>

<p>Because the public would be disserviced from utilities discriminating against customers who might abuse the system to communicate illicit messages (if for no other reason than they may have to call 911 for an actual bona fide need), the governments will usually grant immunity from responsibility from illicit use of the service by a user.   Just as one would not hold a phone company liable for a bomb threat that used their network infrastructure to reach it's recipient, an electric company or water company is not responsible for the use of their services to create artificial sunlight or water plants in a drug grow house.</p>
