Caller ID names on multi-phone accounts...

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@spr=EEntpcs.c=F4m> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>, John=20
R. [email protected] says...
> As I interpreted the information I got from SBC,
> it seems they wanted to be paid by the cellular companies
> to deliver the callers' names along with their numbers.
>=20
> That seems like double-dipping, to me.
> As the subscriber, I'm already paying SBC to deliver those names to =
me.
> I don't agree that the cellular companies should *also* pay SBC for =
that.
> ---JRC---
>=20

If I recall the firestorm this raised correctly, it's also=20
improper, if not illegal. Inform your landline company=20
that you will be reporting this to the state board in=20
charge of telecom. And then do it.

--=20
Actually, Rob, I did both of those things.
But SBC would not restore the cellular caller-name function that I had =
lost.
So I later switched both of my home lines over to another local-service =
provider.
"Guess I showed them!"
---JRC---

---

› See More: Caller ID names on multi-phone accounts...

Rob: Can I have it changed so that it shows the name of my business instead
of my personal name?

NY'er
"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>, John
R. [email protected] says...
> As I interpreted the information I got from SBC,
> it seems they wanted to be paid by the cellular companies
> to deliver the callers' names along with their numbers.
>
> That seems like double-dipping, to me.
> As the subscriber, I'm already paying SBC to deliver those names to me.
> I don't agree that the cellular companies should *also* pay SBC for that.
> ---JRC---
>

If I recall the firestorm this raised correctly, it's also
improper, if not illegal. Inform your landline company
that you will be reporting this to the state board in
charge of telecom. And then do it.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.