Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:25:25 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@proponent.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Worries About Privacy Could Tone Down Success of CID
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 8, Message 2 of 11

 From the 1/4/93 {Boston Globe}

Worries about privacy could tone down success of Caller ID 
		Jonathan Yenkin
		Associated Press

Boston - Caller ID, a phone service touted as an electronic peephole
to let customers see who's calling, is making its way around the
country.  But it may not become a ringing success because of privacy
worries.

The service, which displays the number and sometimes even the name of
the caller, is available in more than 20 states and has won praise for
deterring obscene and annoying phone calls.

But because of privacy concerns, many states have slapped on
restrictions that phone companies fear will undercut the service's
value.

"At what point does the subscriber say, 'It's not worth it anymore?' I
don't know," said Clifton Metcalf, a spokesman for Southern Bell in
North Carolina.  "We're going to find out."

The restrictions imposed by utility regulators allow callers to block
their numbers from appearing on a display unit by the phone.  This can
be done by pressing certain keys when making each call, or, in some
states, by having the line blocked off entirely from being decoded by
Caller ID.

After the state imposed such restrictions in Massachusetts, New
England Telephone officials found them so onerous that they initially
withdrew their plans to offer the service.

Susan Butta, a spokeswoman for New England Telephone, said executives
worried the restrictions might make the service harder to sell.  They
eventually changed their minds and decided to try it.

U.S. West Communications, which serves more than a dozen states,
decided to include the blocking options in its proposals to utility
regulators, not waiting for officials to order them, said Gwen Law, a
company project manager.  Consumer advocates and civil liberties
groups say such restrictions are necessary.  In Pennsylvania, the
state Supreme Court ruled this year [sic] that Caller ID - without the
blocking options - violated the state wiretap law.

Critics often point to battered women or undercover police officers as
examples of people who need to keep their phone numbers secret.

"There are some people for whom the risk of forgetting to block is
very great," said Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer
Federation of America.

But New Jersey Bell, which pioneered Caller ID in the late 1980s,
doesn't offer any blocking, and fewer than 1 percent of customers have
complained about phone numbers leaking out, said company spokesman
James W. Carrigan.

On the other hand, Carrigan said the service has helped deter nuisance
calls.

About 200,000 New Jersey Bell customers, or 4.6 percent, subscribe to
Caller ID.  That compares with a 28 percent acceptance rate for Call
Waiting, which allows customers to receive more than one call at the
same time.

But Carrigan insisted customers in his state who don't have Caller ID
still benefit, "because the other people don't know whether you have
the service, so they won't make that (harassing) call."

In some places, phone companies say they are succeeding with the
service despite the restrictions.

Centel Corp. in Las Vegas, which serves southern Nevada, offers the
blocking options and still has more than 10 percent of its customers
subscribing.

Dianna Fyke, a marketing manager for Centel, said there were some
initial fears, but once people get accustomed to the service it
becomes "a matter of fact thing."