Annoying text messages

So, how the hell do the spammers get the numbers?

Joe


<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi,
>
> I am in California with a Cingular $29.95 250 minutes plan.
>
> I never used text message but usually get 3-5 spam text message each
> month and had to pay $0.1 for each of them. I did not do anything since
> I thought a half dollar did not worth the hassle. But last month, I got
> 53 text messages on my bill. I remember I got about 10, but definitely
> not 53. I called Cingular, they said all 53 are valid, nothing they can
> do.
>
> I asked them to block my text message channel so no more message in the
> future. But I still think I did not get 53 last message. Do you guys
> have any similar experience? I decided to call Cingular again and if
> they do not take it away, I am going to ask to cancel my service. My 1
> year contract expired long time ago.
>
> Thanks,
>
> qq
>

---

› See More: Annoying text messages

In article <[email protected]>, "Joe" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> So, how the hell do the spammers get the numbers?
>
> Joe
>

Two main ways.

1. Buying them from whoever will sell it to them.

2. By just sequentially sending to a known block of Cingular users.

====

I just had Cingular turn off messinging on my lines. Luckily
they have now restored *MIN# and *BAL# free messages.




>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am in California with a Cingular $29.95 250 minutes plan.
> >
> > I never used text message but usually get 3-5 spam text message each
> > month and had to pay $0.1 for each of them. I did not do anything since
> > I thought a half dollar did not worth the hassle. But last month, I got
> > 53 text messages on my bill. I remember I got about 10, but definitely
> > not 53. I called Cingular, they said all 53 are valid, nothing they can
> > do.
> >
> > I asked them to block my text message channel so no more message in the
> > future. But I still think I did not get 53 last message. Do you guys
> > have any similar experience? I decided to call Cingular again and if
> > they do not take it away, I am going to ask to cancel my service. My 1
> > year contract expired long time ago.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > qq
> >

[email protected] wrote:
>
> I guess the carrier likes that too. At this moment, they benefit most
> from the text spam!!!
>
> Ge
>
> B. Peg wrote:
> > >I think you are wrong!
> > >
> > > Even you had not push the "retrieve" button, they would show up on your
> > > bill any way. I guess the rule is once the message hit their server,
> > > you have to pay, no matter you read it or not. In my case, I did not
> > > read(retrieve) them at all.
> >
> > That's not what I meant.
> >
> > When I hit retrieve/read (i.e. to the "Cingular Services" wappush one, which
> > I thought was from Cingular but wasn't, so their C.S. rep says), I somehow
> > got them to "keep responding" with their spam crap. Sort of like telling
> > those e-mail web spammers to quit sending me their crap. Like it ever
> > helps! You'll only get more.
> >
> > Point is, don't respond....ever! Yeah, you still get billed for getting it
> > to begin with, but replying to them only will make your bill larger.
> > <damhik!>
> >
> > Cell phone $pam is in it's infancy. I can only see it getting to be wor$e
> > than the current web spam. Love how spammers get you to pay for it now.
> > >(

Maybe its time for a 'caller pays' regulation.

--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------
My inner child can beat up your inner child.
-- Alex Greenbank

Jackzwick wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, "Joe" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> So, how the hell do the spammers get the numbers?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>
> Two main ways.
>
> 1. Buying them from whoever will sell it to them.
>
> 2. By just sequentially sending to a known block of Cingular users.
>

True, despite current regulations that are supposed to be paid attention
to - including Cingular. Then again, why wouldn't Cingular? Answer:
they have a financial stake to let it continue. If that isn't bad
enough, when you get one of these, ring up a CSR and ask them to tell
you what the message source is? Answer: They know (it's in their
logs), but they won't tell you - they have a financial stake to let it
continue.


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

>Maybe its time for a 'caller pays' regulation.

HEY, there's an idea. make whomever SENDS the ****
have to PAY for it 1st..then try to charge the masses.

Carriers get their $, they don't care, but the
3rd party spammer HAS TO PAY 1ST..then earn his silver.

The carrier now is the collection leg breaker for the
spammers, U no pay/*****, we slow yer machine right down.

ALL this text msg/ringtone charges, pay per stroke crap
brain washed into 2day's kids will be carried into their
middle age(s). Jr. can't read the bill, with his thumbs..



JJTj

Finally, it is all resolved. I called Cingular and told them I wanted
cancel my service if they did not take the message charge out. The lady
took the charge out and thank me for being their customer.

So next time, be brave.


oh..the hard 1's first... wrote:
> >Maybe its time for a 'caller pays' regulation.
>
> HEY, there's an idea. make whomever SENDS the ****
> have to PAY for it 1st..then try to charge the masses.
>
> Carriers get their $, they don't care, but the
> 3rd party spammer HAS TO PAY 1ST..then earn his silver.
>
> The carrier now is the collection leg breaker for the
> spammers, U no pay/*****, we slow yer machine right down.
>
> ALL this text msg/ringtone charges, pay per stroke crap
> brain washed into 2day's kids will be carried into their
> middle age(s). Jr. can't read the bill, with his thumbs..
>
>
>
> JJTj

"marka2k" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> But what if it is not a one time mistake and this continues?
>
> Just food for thought.

On my cellular PDA, I receive fax notices or the fax via browser. I think
the last regulation against spam by fax said they must stop upon
notification or be fined.

I sometimes receive voice messages all in Spanish with caller ID showing.I
had a friend actually drive to their office in Florida to see who the
company was. It's a telemarketing group.

Based on the VoIP-fax link, I've considered filing a complaint for federal
violation of 'voice/text fax' violations.

Thurman, wrote the following at or about 10/6/2006 10:48 AM:
> "marka2k" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> But what if it is not a one time mistake and this continues?
>>
>> Just food for thought.
>
> On my cellular PDA, I receive fax notices or the fax via browser. I think
> the last regulation against spam by fax said they must stop upon
> notification or be fined.

With regard to the SPAM faxes, the federal law was quite simple:

NO faxes were allowed WITHOUT the express permission of the recipient
UNLESS there was a prior business relationship between the sender and
recipient. The relationship COULD NOT be established by sending an
unsolicited fax.

Of course, that has not stopped them


> I sometimes receive voice messages all in Spanish with caller ID showing.I
> had a friend actually drive to their office in Florida to see who the
> company was. It's a telemarketing group.
>
> Based on the VoIP-fax link, I've considered filing a complaint for federal
> violation of 'voice/text fax' violations.

I'm struggling to recall the title of the federal law but one of the
neat things about it is that it provides for you to bring the civil
action yourself in state court in the appropriate court division,
oftentimes in small claims court.

Civil Penalty is something like $500 per violation, minimum and that
money is awarded to you. Collecting is another matter but...

I'm monitoring a case in our local court here in NW Illinois. Guy was
getting faxes from some company (luckily or unluckily) one with deep
pockets. He was asking for a ton of money and they are fighting it out
in court. Costing him next to nothing as his daughter happens to be his
attorney. The company, however, is paying through the nose to defend it
and, if they lose, there is no doubt that he will collect a nice chunk
of change.

Pick your battle wisely. Best to sue somebody you can see, i.e.
somebody in your own state as it simplifies (but doesn't guarantee)
collection of the judgment you might obtain.

Thurman, wrote the following at or about 10/6/2006 10:48 AM:
> "marka2k" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> But what if it is not a one time mistake and this continues?
>>
>> Just food for thought.
>
> On my cellular PDA, I receive fax notices or the fax via browser. I think
> the last regulation against spam by fax said they must stop upon
> notification or be fined.

With regard to the SPAM faxes, the federal law was quite simple:

NO faxes were allowed WITHOUT the express permission of the recipient
UNLESS there was a prior business relationship between the sender and
recipient. The relationship COULD NOT be established by sending an
unsolicited fax.

Of course, that has not stopped them


> I sometimes receive voice messages all in Spanish with caller ID showing.I
> had a friend actually drive to their office in Florida to see who the
> company was. It's a telemarketing group.
>
> Based on the VoIP-fax link, I've considered filing a complaint for federal
> violation of 'voice/text fax' violations.

I'm struggling to recall the title of the federal law but one of the
neat things about it is that it provides for you to bring the civil
action yourself in state court in the appropriate court division,
oftentimes in small claims court.

Civil Penalty is something like $500 per violation, minimum and that
money is awarded to you. Collecting is another matter but...

I'm monitoring a case in our local court here in NW Illinois. Guy was
getting faxes from some company (luckily or unluckily) one with deep
pockets. He was asking for a ton of money and they are fighting it out
in court. Costing him next to nothing as his daughter happens to be his
attorney. The company, however, is paying through the nose to defend it
and, if they lose, there is no doubt that he will collect a nice chunk
of change.

Pick your battle wisely. Best to sue somebody you can see, i.e.
somebody in your own state as it simplifies (but doesn't guarantee)
collection of the judgment you might obtain.

Unquestionably Confused wrote:
> I'm monitoring a case in our local court here in NW Illinois. Guy was
> getting faxes from some company (luckily or unluckily) one with deep
> pockets. He was asking for a ton of money and they are fighting it out
> in court. Costing him next to nothing as his daughter happens to be his
> attorney. The company, however, is paying through the nose to defend it
> and, if they lose, there is no doubt that he will collect a nice chunk
> of change.

Please keep us updated on that one!

BTW, I wouldn't exactly call your location "NW Illinois". Maybe NW of
Berwyn.

--
More abuse of eminent domain!
http://www.villagelandgrab.com/

clifto, wrote the following at or about 10/8/2006 5:43 PM:
> Unquestionably Confused wrote:
>> I'm monitoring a case in our local court here in NW Illinois. Guy was
>> getting faxes from some company (luckily or unluckily) one with deep
>> pockets. He was asking for a ton of money and they are fighting it out
>> in court. Costing him next to nothing as his daughter happens to be his
>> attorney. The company, however, is paying through the nose to defend it
>> and, if they lose, there is no doubt that he will collect a nice chunk
>> of change.
>
> Please keep us updated on that one!
>
> BTW, I wouldn't exactly call your location "NW Illinois". Maybe NW of
> Berwyn.

Doh! You ever have one of those days? Should have been NW Suburban
area of Chicago<g>