kafa88 Prof. Member
Geregistreerd op: 31 Jan 2021 Berichten: 140
|
Geplaatst: 02-04-2021 08:54:48 Onderwerp: The US Supreme Court supports Facebook in the case |
|
|
The U.S. Supreme Court on download slotxo Thursday made it easier for businesses to annoy consumers with phone calls or text messages by submitting a lawsuit accusing Facebook Inc of violating federal anti-robocall laws.The judge in a 9-0 decision, written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, sided with Facebook over his argument that the messages sent by the social media company did not violate a 1991 federal law called the Consumer Protection Act. Telephone (TCPA)The case underscores the challenge of the judge in applying outdated law to modern technology. The ruling sparked calls for the United States Congress to revise a law enacted three decades ago to reduce telemarketing violations by banning most unauthorized calls to robocall.
By narrowing the scope of TCPA, the courts have allowed companies to attack citizens with non-stop calls and messages at all times," said Democratic Senator Edward Markey and Democratic Representative Anna Eshoo. Keep the testimony.The court ruled that Facebook's actions - sending text messages without their consent - were inconsistent with the technical definition of the type of behavior banned by law enacted before modern mobile technology came into existence.The lawsuit, filed in 2015 in California federal court by Montana resident Noah Duid, said Facebook sent him a large number of automated messages without his consent. The lawsuit alleges that the Menlo Park Facebook in California violated the restrictions of the Consumer Telephone Protection Act on the use of automated telephone dialing systems.
Facebook said the security messages it raised when users tried to log into their accounts from a new device or internet browser were tied to a user's mobile phone number.According to the court, the provisions of the law were never intended to prohibit companies from sending targeted security alerts, and the court ruling would allow companies to continue working to maintain the accounts of their users. They are safe, ”Facebook said in a statement.Duguid's attorney, Sergei Lemberg, said anyone can avoid liability under the law as long as they use similar technology to Facebook.This is a disappointing decision for anyone who owns a cell phone or values their privacy," added Lemberg.
In this case, the lawsuit alleges that Facebook's automated messaging system was similar to a traditional automated dialer called an autodialer used to send robocalls.Duguid's bickering is about Congress, which doesn't automatically designate the examiner as disrespectful as he wants," Sotomayor wrote in the hearing.The law requires that the equipment used must be used. But the court concluded that Facebook's system "did not use such technology," Sotomayor added.Duguid said Facebook repeatedly sent him account login notifications, sending messages to his mobile phone even though he was not a Facebook user and had never been. Despite numerous efforts, Duguid said he couldn't stop Facebook from "robotexting".Facebook replied that Duguid is often assigned a phone number that was previously associated with Facebook users who opted for the notification.
A federal judge filed the lawsuit, but in 2019, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco revived the case. But only devices that automatically dial randomly generated numbers are prohibited. But also stores numbers that are not randomly generated.The National Association of Federally-insured Credit Unions said the decision. "The narrow interpretation automatically is a win for the credit union industry.We have long fought for this clarity to ensure credit unions can contact their members with critical and timely financial information without fear of violating TCPA and facing non-critical lawsuits," said the association. Said in a statement |
|