BT sued over porn dialler block

[Paul]

This could be an interesting argument in court
The Register

BT is facing legal action over its decision to block premium-rate lines suspected of being used by rogue dialler companies to rip off punters and rack up huge phone bills.
Birmingham-based Opera Telecom is suing BT for blocking access to lines Opera leases to adult content outfit Netcollex and is seeking compensation for lost revenues.
BT says it will "vigorously defend" the action, which is due to be heard in the High Court on Friday.
In June last year BT responded to mounting concerns about rogue dialler software - which secretly changes a computer's settings to call a premium rate phone line instead of its usual ISP number - and began "proactively blocking calls to these numbers.

[Damien]

I hope BT win. Rogue daillers have cost people and BT was just taking steps to protect its customers.

[Ramrod]

The plaintiffs will probably try to prove that BT are also blocking legit lines.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Damien

I hope BT win. Rogue daillers have cost people and BT was just taking steps to protect its customers.

Same here, but supporting BT does make me feel a bit tainted...

[Halcyon]

I too hope BT win.
The people behinfd dialers are criminels and there should be no space for them to operate anywhere.

[punky]

I am not a fan of enforced censorship. What if you want to dial the number? Find someone who hasn't got BT? What if BT don't keep an accurate list or monitor changes well? It could block lines to competitions and votes.

The idea of blocking some suspected rogue numbers is a good idea though. It should be entirely voluntary. I do wonder how effective it could be as I am sure the people involved could change numbers much quicker and easier than BT could observe.

It looks like though, BT has decided to make the ban optional anyway (but only because of impending legal action), which is a plus nonetheless.

[Damien]

Well how many people even know that stuff like that is no there computers? The block should be default but if people want it they can remove the block

[scrotnig]

The solution to all of this is simple.

09XXX numbers should be blocked by default, and then if you want them you ring and have them enabled.

This is the opposite way round to how it is at the moment.

It won't change though, because big business is involved and they must have their profits at the expense of ripping people off.

Originally Posted by scrotnig

The solution to all of this is simple.

09XXX numbers should be blocked by default, and then if you want them you ring and have them enabled.

Sure, that makes as much sense as IIRC ntl once requiring you to request a newsgroup be added to their servers in a *public* forum!

<ring> <ring>

"Hello, yes, I'd like to be able to dial up porographic sex lines, please can you add that service. My name and address is..."

[AndrewJ]

Or you can go out to a club and do the real thing? nets full of fakes.

As for BT I hope they win, be one more down for those who dont know about computers to live in bliss of not knowing.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Paul

This could be an interesting argument in court
The Register

If the company named was changing a users settings without permission (as suggested by Reg) then this would be profiting from a crime, so I'm guessing they haven't quite got their facts straight. Most of these diallers come as a result of accepting T&Cs for something or another and they piggy-back, or are from outisde of the UK's regulation.

Originally Posted by scrotnig

The solution to all of this is simple.

09XXX numbers should be blocked by default, and then if you want them you ring and have them enabled.

Good idea. Of course the simplest way of avoiding rogue diallers is to get BB and unplug your modem.

Originally Posted by Graham

"Hello, yes, I'd like to be able to dial up porographic sex lines, please can you add that service. My name and address is..."

This could all be done online and without have to phone up and 'admit' to your....erm...activities. A webpage that can be the users interface into what's blocked and what's permitted would be useful, or having to dial your PIN when accessing premium rate numbers.

Originally Posted by scrotnig

It won't change though, because big business is involved and they must have their profits at the expense of ripping people off.

Well it's OFCOM and ICTIS that are responsible for legislating thit, not the telcos.

Originally Posted by andygrif

This could all be done online and without have to phone up and 'admit' to your....erm...activities.

It still puts an extra barrier in the path of those who want to use these services and that, IMO is not a good thing.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Graham

It still puts an extra barrier in the path of those who want to use these services and that, IMO is not a good thing.

Either way there will be the barrier between it being turned on by default and it being turned off by default.

Now the people who want to do this will know about the price and the dangers but a lot of people don’t. If they want the service then all they have to do is log into a website and allow it. They know its there, they choose to use it.

The other (and larger) group of people are the ones who do not know about this. So the program can ring up the number and rack up phone changes without the user permission. It is the wrong way around, if everyone knew it was there then it wouldn’t be a problem but no-one does so surely having it on by default is bad as the users don’t know its there so they wont be aware they should switch an option on. While those who want it would be aware.

At the moment there is a massive uptake in computing and computers from the public, many of which do not understand the steps they should take. Or they do, but they simply install an anti-virus and think they are protected. In this environment the most secure options should be on by default. Not the other way around.

Why do you think it is better for the line to be allowed by default?

[AndrewJ]

I wonder if people think this of having it blocked is a bad idea, and so wrong as should be open and other methods used think of this one.

While there is other methods to be used perhaps, I think the main one of having to ring up to have it permitted or having a passworded check box to permit it, would stop the pitter patty of kids finding half of this stuff and also could help keep chat clean and safe for children.

[ikthius]

I am for BT.

some people room the net and accidently find a porn site, then all of a sudden, you have a dialler changing your settings.

if it is a crime to send out a virus that can change your settings *and cause malicious damage* then a dialer should be considered the same.

I did not ask for them, and I don't know how I got it, then they are getting into your system without your consent and changing things.

THIS IS NOT RIGHT OR FAIR

therefore, I would like BT to win and send a message out to other companies that have rougue dialers.

ik