HB 23-19: Off The Hook Act (Passed)

[thumb21]

A BILL
To empower the Federal Communications Commission to deter spam calls and inforce the responsibility of individual phone companies to protect their consumers

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

Section 1. Title

This legislation may be cited as the Off The Hook Act.

Section 2. Definitions

1. In this act, the term “voice service” means any service that is interconnected with the public switched telephone network and that furnishes voice communications to an end user using resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934; and includes—

(A) transmissions from a telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to a telephone facsimile machine; and

(B) without limitation, any service that enables real-time, two-way voice communications, including any service that requires internet protocol-compatible customer premises equipment (commonly known as “CPE”) and permits out-bound calling, whether or not the service is one-way or two-way voice over internet protocol.

2. In this act, the term “one-ring scam” means a scam in which a caller makes a call and allows the call to ring the called party for a short duration, in order to prompt the called party to return the call, thereby subjecting the called party to charges.

Section 3. Consumer protection regulations relating to making robocalls

1. Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall prescribe such regulations, or amend such existing regulations, regarding calls made or text messages sent using automatic telephone dialing systems and calls made using an artificial or prerecorded voice as will, in the judgment of the Commission, clarify descriptions of automatic telephone dialing systems and ensure that—

(1) the consumer protection and privacy purposes of such section are effectuated;

(2) calls made and text messages sent using automatic telephone dialing systems and calls made using an artificial or prerecorded voice are made or sent (as the case may be) with consent, unless consent is not required under or the call or text message is exempted by the Federal Communications Act of 1934;

(3) consumers can withdraw consent for such calls and text messages;

(4) circumvention or evasion of such section is prevented;

(5) callers maintain records to demonstrate that such callers have obtained consent, unless consent is not required under or the call or text message is exempted by the Communications Act of 1934.

Section 4. Four-Year Statute of Limitations

1. For robocall violations and caller identification information violations, the length of time for which forfeiture penalties may be determined or imposed shall be extended from two years to four.

Section 5. Increased maximum penalty for robocall violations with intent

1. In the case of a forfeiture penalty for robocall violations, the amount of such penalty shall not exceed $10,000.

Section 6. Regulations relating to effective call authentication technology

1. No later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, providers of voice service shall be require to implement an effective call authentication technology and ensure that voice service providers that have implemented the effective authentication technology attest that such provider has determined, when originating calls on behalf of a calling party, that the calling party number transmitted with such calls has been appropriately authenticated.

2. The Federal Communications Commission shall reassess such regulations, at least once every 2 years, to ensure the regulations remain effective and up to date with technological capabilities.

3. Providers of voice service shall be prohibited from making any additional line item charges to consumer or small business customer subscribers for the effective call authentication technology required under this section.

Section 7. Provision of evidence of certain robocall violations to Attorney General

1. If the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission obtains evidence that suggests a willful, knowing, and repeated robocall violation with an intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value, the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau shall provide such evidence to the Attorney General.

Section 8. Protection from one-ring scams

1. Initiation of proceeding.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a proceeding to protect called parties from one-ring scams.

2. Matters to be considered.—As part of the proceeding required by subsection (a), the Commission shall consider how the Commission can—

(1) work with Federal, Regional, and State law enforcement agencies to address one-ring scams;

(2) work with the governments of foreign countries to address one-ring scams;

(3) in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission, better educate consumers about how to avoid one-ring scams;

(4) incentivize voice service providers to stop calls made to perpetrate one-ring scams from being received by called parties, including consideration of adding identified one-ring scam type numbers to the Commission’s existing list of permissible categories for carrier-initiated blocking;

(5) work with entities that provide call-blocking services to address one-ring scams; and

(6) establish obligations on international gateway providers that are the first point of entry for these calls into the Republic of Atlasia, including potential requirements that such providers verify with the foreign originator the nature or purpose of calls before initiating service.

People's Regional Senate
Passed 4-0 in the Atlasian Senate Assembled,

Sponsor: Thumb21
House Designation: HB 23-19

72 hours to debate.

[thumb21]

I took this one out of the Senate to House queue to speed up its passage a little bit. It is a fairly basic bipartisan consumer protection law which regulates spam robocalls, which aren't just annoying but can also lead to consumers being victimised by scammers. This bill allows the FCC to crack down on and requires service providers block these sorts of spam calls.

[Elcaspar]

This is a commonsense consumer protection bill. I will support this.

[thumb21]

Does anyone else have thoughts on this?

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

I'm interested in the behavior of entities like the FCC in-game versus IRL. For instance, this FCC press release from March 31, 2020, mandates that all voice service providers implement the 'STIR/SHAKEN' authentication technology by June 30, 2021. The release states that this date is 'a deadline that is consistent with Congress’s direction in the recently-enacted TRACED Act' (the TRACED Act, being, of course, the bill that this Off the Hook Act is based on).

Perhaps this is a question for the GM, but are the actions of the FCC IRL equivalent to those in game? If so, we're in the funny situation that the FCC has already ordered implementation of authentication systems and we in Congress (being behind RL by several months with this bill) are simply advising them to do so after the fact.

[thumb21]

I'm interested in the behavior of entities like the FCC in-game versus IRL. For instance, this FCC press release from March 31, 2020, mandates that all voice service providers implement the 'STIR/SHAKEN' authentication technology by June 30, 2021. The release states that this date is 'a deadline that is consistent with Congress’s direction in the recently-enacted TRACED Act' (the TRACED Act, being, of course, the bill that this Off the Hook Act is based on).

Perhaps this is a question for the GM, but are the actions of the FCC IRL equivalent to those in game? If so, we're in the funny situation that the FCC has already ordered implementation of authentication systems and we in Congress (being behind RL by several months with this bill) are simply advising them to do so after the fact.

My assumption would be that if this release was a result of an IRL act of congress that hasn't passed in-game, that it wouldn't've happened yet - unless the GM says otherwise.

I'll PM Lumine for confirmation.

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

I'm interested in the behavior of entities like the FCC in-game versus IRL. For instance, this FCC press release from March 31, 2020, mandates that all voice service providers implement the 'STIR/SHAKEN' authentication technology by June 30, 2021. The release states that this date is 'a deadline that is consistent with Congress’s direction in the recently-enacted TRACED Act' (the TRACED Act, being, of course, the bill that this Off the Hook Act is based on).

Perhaps this is a question for the GM, but are the actions of the FCC IRL equivalent to those in game? If so, we're in the funny situation that the FCC has already ordered implementation of authentication systems and we in Congress (being behind RL by several months with this bill) are simply advising them to do so after the fact.

My assumption would be that if this release was a result of an IRL act of congress that hasn't passed in-game, that it wouldn't've happened yet - unless the GM says otherwise.

I'll PM Lumine for confirmation.

The release wasn't necessarily a result of TRACED, as the FCC had been promoting implementation of STIR/SHAKEN for a few years prior to this. I do want to figure out if those actions taken by the FCC IRL were ordered by any separate pieces of legislation on an earlier date (say, in the 2014-2018 period) that do not have in-game counterparts, because that certainly would affect the FCC's in-game actions.

[Lumine]

CLARIFICATION / NATIONAL

TRACED Act and the FCC

For clarification and after taking into account the lack of a TRACED Act equivalent in Atlasia, it is ruled that the FCC has not issued any recent directives relating to said non-existent legislation or in the subject at hand.

[cinyc]

CLARIFICATION / NATIONAL

TRACED Act and the FCC

For clarification and after taking into account the lack of a TRACED Act equivalent in Atlasia, it is ruled that the FCC has not issued any recent directives relating to said non-existent legislation or in the subject at hand.

So you’re saying we’d need to rewrite this?

[thumb21]

CLARIFICATION / NATIONAL

TRACED Act and the FCC

For clarification and after taking into account the lack of a TRACED Act equivalent in Atlasia, it is ruled that the FCC has not issued any recent directives relating to said non-existent legislation or in the subject at hand.

So you’re saying we’d need to rewrite this?

No, this bill is based on an IRL bill that was passed last year and the FCC recently published a release which was in large part related to that bill. Encke wanted to know if that release still happened in-game, and Lumine has clarified that it didn't.

[thumb21]

Unless any of our new members have anything they want to add, motion for a final vote.

[cinyc]

I'd like 24 hours from now to look at the proposed law before proceeding to a vote. It's complicated.

[thumb21]

I'd like 24 hours from now to look at the proposed law before proceeding to a vote. It's complicated.

Thats fine, I'll open the vote tomorrow.

[thumb21]

Final vote

72 hours

[thumb21]

Aye

[PPT Spiral]

Aye

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Aye

[Elcaspar]

Aye

[cinyc]

Aye. I found nothing objectionable when going through it.

[Leinad]

Aye

[OSR stands with Israel]

Aye

[RC (a la Frémont)]

Aye

[thumb21]

Passed

8-0-0-1

[thumb21]

A BILL
To empower the Federal Communications Commission to deter spam calls and inforce the responsibility of individual phone companies to protect their consumers

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

Section 1. Title

This legislation may be cited as the Off The Hook Act.

Section 2. Definitions

1. In this act, the term “voice service” means any service that is interconnected with the public switched telephone network and that furnishes voice communications to an end user using resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934; and includes—

(A) transmissions from a telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to a telephone facsimile machine; and

(B) without limitation, any service that enables real-time, two-way voice communications, including any service that requires internet protocol-compatible customer premises equipment (commonly known as “CPE”) and permits out-bound calling, whether or not the service is one-way or two-way voice over internet protocol.

2. In this act, the term “one-ring scam” means a scam in which a caller makes a call and allows the call to ring the called party for a short duration, in order to prompt the called party to return the call, thereby subjecting the called party to charges.

Section 3. Consumer protection regulations relating to making robocalls

1. Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall prescribe such regulations, or amend such existing regulations, regarding calls made or text messages sent using automatic telephone dialing systems and calls made using an artificial or prerecorded voice as will, in the judgment of the Commission, clarify descriptions of automatic telephone dialing systems and ensure that—

(1) the consumer protection and privacy purposes of such section are effectuated;

(2) calls made and text messages sent using automatic telephone dialing systems and calls made using an artificial or prerecorded voice are made or sent (as the case may be) with consent, unless consent is not required under or the call or text message is exempted by the Federal Communications Act of 1934;

(3) consumers can withdraw consent for such calls and text messages;

(4) circumvention or evasion of such section is prevented;

(5) callers maintain records to demonstrate that such callers have obtained consent, unless consent is not required under or the call or text message is exempted by the Communications Act of 1934.

Section 4. Four-Year Statute of Limitations

1. For robocall violations and caller identification information violations, the length of time for which forfeiture penalties may be determined or imposed shall be extended from two years to four.

Section 5. Increased maximum penalty for robocall violations with intent

1. In the case of a forfeiture penalty for robocall violations, the amount of such penalty shall not exceed $10,000.

Section 6. Regulations relating to effective call authentication technology

1. No later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, providers of voice service shall be require to implement an effective call authentication technology and ensure that voice service providers that have implemented the effective authentication technology attest that such provider has determined, when originating calls on behalf of a calling party, that the calling party number transmitted with such calls has been appropriately authenticated.

2. The Federal Communications Commission shall reassess such regulations, at least once every 2 years, to ensure the regulations remain effective and up to date with technological capabilities.

3. Providers of voice service shall be prohibited from making any additional line item charges to consumer or small business customer subscribers for the effective call authentication technology required under this section.

Section 7. Provision of evidence of certain robocall violations to Attorney General

1. If the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission obtains evidence that suggests a willful, knowing, and repeated robocall violation with an intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value, the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau shall provide such evidence to the Attorney General.

Section 8. Protection from one-ring scams

1. Initiation of proceeding.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a proceeding to protect called parties from one-ring scams.

2. Matters to be considered.—As part of the proceeding required by subsection (a), the Commission shall consider how the Commission can—

(1) work with Federal, Regional, and State law enforcement agencies to address one-ring scams;

(2) work with the governments of foreign countries to address one-ring scams;

(3) in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission, better educate consumers about how to avoid one-ring scams;

(4) incentivize voice service providers to stop calls made to perpetrate one-ring scams from being received by called parties, including consideration of adding identified one-ring scam type numbers to the Commission’s existing list of permissible categories for carrier-initiated blocking;

(5) work with entities that provide call-blocking services to address one-ring scams; and

(6) establish obligations on international gateway providers that are the first point of entry for these calls into the Republic of Atlasia, including potential requirements that such providers verify with the foreign originator the nature or purpose of calls before initiating service.

People's Regional Senate
Passed 4-0 in the Atlasian Senate Assembled,

House of Representatives
Passed the House of Representatives 8-0-0-1