Abstract:
The integration of various federally required and state mandated do-not-call lists for telemarketers into a system that automatically blocks outgoing calls from a number of companies (“Customer Companies”) taking into account factors such as preexisting customers which may legally be contacted is disclosed. The system reviews outgoing calls by a telemarketer, compares it to the general do-not-call lists and the specific customer company do-not-call list and override permitted call list to make a determination if the call should be completed. This integration is due to the incorporation of a general purpose computer in a central location that is connected to all the major telephone carriers switch cluster locations and operated by a service provider. The “do-not-call” database of originating/destination pairs, as well as the logic for blocking or permitting telephone calls, is stored in this computer. This computer makes all blocking decisions in real-time based on the originating and destination number combinations of the call.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     1. Field of the Invention 
     The invention concerns telephone systems generally and more specifically, concerns the blocking of outgoing phone calls to phone numbers which have been placed on a do-not-call list. 
     2. Prior Art 
     In recent years the door to door salesman has been replaced by telephone solicitation. Rather than a salesman walking a route, a telemarketer makes a series of telephone calls. The telephone numbers dialed are normally on a call list given to the telemarketing salesman by his employer. The call list may be organized by address, consumer information or by the numbers themselves. Just as the consumer can slam the door in the face of a door to door salesman, the consumer may hang up upon receiving a telephone solicitation. However, the call itself is considered by many to be an intrusive act. The widespread nature of telephone solicitation means that certain segments of the public are desirous of being protected from even receiving such calls. Thus, a number of private organizations were created to inform direct marketers as to those who did not wish to receive such phone calls. Organizations produced do-not-call lists from those who do not wish to receive telemarketing solicitations and provided such lists to those direct marketeers who voluntarily comply with the consumer&#39;s request. Upon receipt of these lists, these marketeers would delete the listed numbers from their telemarketer&#39;s call lists. Such do not call lists work both to the benefit of the people who do not wish to receive calls and to the soliciting company which has its call list referred to a more select group of potential consumers that are more receptive of telephone sales pitches. 
     The Federal Government requires each telemarketer to maintain its own “do-not-call” lists and to add to the list the name of anyone so requesting exclusion from telephone calls from their company. Under the statute, fines can be assessed against companies that call numbers on the company&#39;s do-not-call list. The consumer is given the right to sue any company which calls them after they have requested that the company place them on the do-not-call list. In addition, a number of state governments, including those of Florida, Oregon, Arizona, Alaska, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Arkansas and Georgia, maintain, or in the near future, will be maintaining, statewide do-not-call lists which are applicable to all vendors calling numbers in the state. 
     Thus, a telemarketer is faced with a legal responsibility under federal and state law to refrain from calling numbers maintained on separate lists including their own internal list and lists maintained by a number of state governments. On penalty of fine and civil action, the responsibility is laid on the telemarketer to ensure that no do-not-call numbers are, in fact, called. In addition, they may have one or more organizations do-not-call list with which the telemarketer wishes to comply. Accordingly, companies developed their final call lists for their telemarketer by comparing and matching their federally required do-not-call list, various state do-not-call lists and organizational do-not-call lists with their telemarketer&#39;s call lists and eliminating any matching numbers from their call list. This process has until now been done manually and is subject to human error. There is a large number of employees who must be committed to this effort. Even with this effort, the process does not eliminate the possibility of an employee innocently calling a number from an old call list or an employee simply disregarding the company&#39;s do-not-call list altogether in the search for commissions. 
     In addition, certain ambiguities develop in use. For example, a prior purchaser may have placed his name on a state mandated list. The hand process would eliminate that number although the customer may, in fact, wish to receive the call and by his former purchases, is a permitted callee under the state law. 
     Various attempts have been made to control out-going calls, usually to restrict long distance toll calls or to a single list of restricted numbers. A number of systems have been directed to stopping the making of long distance calls or specific area calls from a given location. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,612,419, to Smith, entitled Toll Restriction Circuit for Electronic Telephone Station, describes a means controlling toll calls only and is employed within the telephone station itself. It looks for a 0 and 1 in the first dialed digit, the subscriber can lock and unlock the device by a key pad entry with an enabling and disabling code. U.S. Pat. No. 4,358,640, to Murray, entitled Telephone Security Device, issued Nov. 9, 1982, describes a circuit which has means to allow or disallow toll calls on entry of a programmable code stored. U.S. Pat. No. 4,794,642, to Arbabzadah et al., Call Screening in a Public Telephone Station, issued Dec. 27, 1988, discloses control equipment in a customer owned public telephone station which prevents a user from making unauthorized telephone calls in a telephone system. The system restricts telephone numbers a user can dial to those numbers preselected by a station owner. U.S. Pat. No. 5,200,995, to Gaukel et al., issued Apr. 6, 1993, entitled Universal Outgoing Call Restriction Circuit, discloses a circuit which prevents a telephone or a plurality of telephones from making unauthorized or restricted calls to specific numbers or unspecific groups of numbers. Essentially the system compares the numbers against preprogrammed internal lists of restricted numbers. 
     None of these patents disclose a system necessary to handle the blocking requirements under federal and state law and lists prepared by various blocking organizations. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     A system which would monitor and quickly update all such lists for a number of companies would be beneficial to both the consumers who wish to be protected from telephone solicitation and the soliciting companies. Such a system would have to be able to block or specifically permit calls from specific originating numbers to specific destination numbers. To be useful, the do-not-call decision would have to be fully automatic and include the capability of dynamically changing the do-not-call list for specific originating/destination phone number pairs as individuals request blocking or become clients of the company in question. Each calling company must be capable of adding or deleting numbers from the company&#39;s specific do-not-call list without affecting another company&#39;s list. Equally, each company must have the option of automatically blocking numbers on the state mandated list or to block only from their own do-not-call list. Equally such a system must be capable of supporting a single company specific do-not-call list for multiple offices of the same company in different geographic locations. Finally, it must be able to import, in bulk, large numbers of specific telephone number combinations. 
     The present invention is directed to integration of various do-not-call lists into a system that automatically blocks outgoing calls from a number of companies (“Customer Companies”) taking into account factors such as preexisting customers which may legally be contacted. Thus, rather than modifying the call lists for each customer company, it acts to review the outgoing call, compare it to the general do-not-call lists and the specific customer company do-not-call list and override permitted call list to make a determination if the call should be completed. This integration is due to the incorporation of a general purpose computer in a central location that is connected to all the major telephone carriers switch cluster locations and operated by a service provider. The “do-not-call” database of originating/destination pairs, as well as the logic for blocking or permitting telephone calls, is stored in this central computer. This computer makes all blocking decisions in real-time based on the originating and destination number combinations of the call. 
     All participating customer companies have access to a separate part of this database (“updating do-not-call database”) for the purpose of adding or deleting numbers on their company specific do-not-call lists or to permit override of specific numbers on any state mandated or organizational do-not-call lists. Since this database receives information from various companies and from a number of state and organizational do-not-call lists, it must be accessible from different geographical locations. Accordingly, the database is maintained using the Internet. The Internet acts as a customer interface that will permit any customer who has access to the Internet to enter change requests for specific do-not-call lists. 
     Under normal telephone practice when a call is originated, the information for the call is transported to the primary switch cluster for the telecommunications carrier. This information includes both the originating number, or where the caller has a trunk line, the AuthCode (a seven digit number corresponding to the originating trunk group of the caller) and the called number(“originating/destination pair”). If the caller is from a participating customer company on the present do-not-call blocking system, the switch cluster recognizes the originating number or authorization code and the originating/destination pair information is transported from the switch cluster to the control computer while the call is held at the switch cluster. The control computer&#39;s function is to then process the information and create a command to either block that call or permit the call to be completed. Once the decision is made, the control computer indicates the decision to the carrier&#39;s switch cluster and a command is implemented at the switch cluster to either allow the call to be completed or to return a message to the telemarketer indicating that it has been blocked under the call blocking system. 
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     The invention can be more fully understood from consideration of the following detailed description of an illustrative embodiment of the invention and the accompanying drawings in which: 
     FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic representation of the components of the control system; 
     FIG. 2 is a flow diagram showing the overall call block processing; 
     FIG. 3 is a diagrammatic representation of the various elements forming the control computer do-not-call database; 
     FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of decision making process performed by the control computer; 
     FIG. 5 is a diagrammatic representation of the components of the system to update the do-not-call database; 
     FIG. 6 is a flow diagram of data entry to the customer&#39;s do-not-call database by the Internet; 
     FIG. 7 is a flow diagram for transferring the updated database information to the control computers; 
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
     The present invention encompasses not only the specific method of blocking the telephone calls but of maintaining and updating the do-not-call database and its component lists both in general and for specific customer companies. In particular the invention includes the periodic synchronizing of the do-not-call databases with a master updating database which is periodically updated by customers through the internet and by state and consumer organizations latest do-not-call lists. 
     FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic representation of how the control computer of the present invention interconnects with the normal telephone system. Telemarketing customer companies  10 - 12  receive their telephone services from one or more telephone companies or carriers. The customer companies  10 - 12  are connected to its own telecommunications company provider by conventional means such as plain old telephone service lines (POTS), T 1  line, feature D, or any other conventional telephonic linkage. The telecommunication company provides a dial tone to the customer for a telephone call and performs all normal communication functions. Calls are placed from hand sets  15 - 20  at the respective customers  10 - 12  to their local primary telephone switch cluster  13 - 14 . 
     As seen in FIG. 1, customer companies  10  and  11  have their telephone service provided through the same primary switch cluster  13 . Customer company  12 , has its telephone service provided through primary switch cluster  14 . As is normal with any telephone call, when a call is placed from handsets  15 - 19  information both as to the originating number of the hand set and the destination number which was dialed by the customer company (i.e., the originating/destination pair) is supplied to the switch cluster  13 - 14 . In normal operation, the primary switch cluster  13  and  14  would then route the signal to the destination number dialed at the respective telemarketer&#39;s hand sets  15 - 20  through the telephone system  25 . In the present system, the switch cluster  13 - 14  determines from the originating number or AuthCode whether the call is to be reviewed for a do not call determination. If the originating number is one of the numbers from which calls are to be reviewed, the switch cluster  13 - 14  holds the call and forwards the originating destination pair to a control computer  26 - 27  for a determination of whether the call should be made or blocked by reference to their respective databases either stored on that computer  26 - 27  or in separate storage means  28 - 29 . 
     In actuality, there may be two or more redundant control computers  26 - 27  performing the function. While each such computer will be designed to handle the complete load of anticipated call traffic, the traffic load may be divided evenly between the redundant computers  26 - 27 . Thus, if one of the control computers  26  cannot handle a call routed to it for any reason, one of the alternative control computers  27  can automatically take over. Although shown as two computers in FIG. 1, a number of such redundant computers may be used and, in fact, such control computers may be geographically distributed throughout the country, creating a system with multiplex redundancies and, therefore, extremely high reliability. Geographic distribution also makes this system more easily adapted to handle numerous wide-spread offices of a single company in a uniform manner. Of course, the do not call database  28 - 29  for each of the redundant computers would have duplicate information and their updating be improved so that each blocking computer  26 - 27  would respond in the same way in making a call blocking decision. 
     FIG. 2 is a flow diagram showing the process for blocking an individual telephone call. The telemarketer of a customer company  10 - 12  dials his handset  15 - 20  in a conventional manner  31 . As normal in modem telecommunications, by so dialing the handset  15 - 20 , the customer company  10 - 13  originates a signal corresponding both to the dialer&#39;s originating telephone number or where the handset is on a private trunk line, its AuthCode, and the destination number ,i.e., the originating/destination pair. This information is transported in the normal manner  32  to the telemarketer&#39;s telecommunication company&#39;s carrier&#39;s primary switch cluster  13 - 14 . At the cluster, the switch  13 - 14  determines if the call originates from a handset  15 - 20  which is subject to call blocking  33 . If not, the call is then automatically routed normally  34  to the destination telephone number. However, when the call originates from a telephone handset  15 - 16  which is subject to blocking, the call is so recognized by the primary switch cluster  13 - 14 , the call is held at the switch cluster  13 - 14  and the originating/destination pair information is transported  35  to one of the control computers  26 - 27 . The control computer  26 - 27  then determines whether the calls should be permitted or blocked by execution of a block/complete algorithm  36  as more fully discussed below. Upon making the appropriate determination, the control computer  26 - 27  transports the decision  37  to the switch cluster  13 - 14 . Depending upon this determination  38 , either the call is blocked  39  and a message is forwarded to the telemarketer  40  indicating that the call has been blocked or is routed normally  40 . The entire decision making process is very rapid. It is unlikely that a telemarketer will notice any delay in placing the call. 
     The block/complete algorithm used to make the block decision  36  is based on the information in the redundant do not call databases  28 - 29 . As seen most clearly in FIG. 3 each redundant database  28 - 29  consists of a number of component lists  45 - 49 . The database  28 - 29  is structured around the customer identification list  45 . This list is composed of an identification code or number (“CN”) for each customer and the telephone numbers and/or AuthCodes corresponding to each customer. All originating telephone numbers and AuthCodes are tagged with the customer&#39;s CN. All offices of a single company have a single CN. List  45  entries may also contain one or more flags called private organization or PO flags that determines whether or not a customer has chosen to be blocked from calling the numbers on one or more private organization maintained lists. If the value of a PO flag is false, the customer has chosen not to be blocked by that private organization&#39;s do-not-call list. List  45  allows the control computer to select the relevant information from lists  48 - 49  and determine whether to use list  47 . 
     List  46  is a composite list of all the state generated lists from all relevant states. To this list may be added individuals who have requested the service provider to be so protected. The resulting list may be sorted by area code and number. 
     Since the state mandated lists are for all telemarketing done within the state regardless of the source, they are not tagged for, or associated with, individual customers. Similar do-not-call lists are maintained by private organizations are not customer company specific  47 . Such lists are for all telemarketers and are thus not tagged by customer companies. List  48  is the federally required do-not-call list which must be maintained by each telemarketer. This list is a compilation of all those individuals who, when called by a customer company  10 - 13 , indicated that they wished no further calls. Since each such list is peculiar to the customer company, it is tagged with the customer company&#39;s CN. The final list  49  forming each redundant database  28 - 29  is the customer company&#39;s override/allow lists. The customer company may have established relations with one or more individuals who, while unwilling to accept telemarketing calls in general, are willing to accept telemarketing calls from this particular customer company. This list contains all such numbers for a customer company and is tagged with the customer company&#39;s CN to permit calls to such persons  53  by the allowed customer company. 
     FIG. 4 is a flow diagram showing the process for carrying out the Block/Complete Algorithm. When an originating/destination pair arrive at the control computer for review, it is first compared  55  with the customer list  45  to confirm that the originating number is that of a customer company. If it is not, the call is completed  56 . If, however, it is on the customer identification list  45 , the CN for the originating number is determined and used in obtaining the appropriate information from lists  48  and  49 . 
     The called number is then compared  58  to the federally required do-not-call list  48 . As previously noted, this do-not-call list is tagged with the customer company&#39;s CN. If the called number is on the federally required do-not-call list for that customer company, the call is blocked  59 . If, on the other hand, the called number is not on the federally required list  48  for the customer company, i.e., the number is either not on the list or it is not called with the CN of the calling customer company. If the same number is to be blocked for two different customer companies, the number appears twice on the do-not-call list  48 , each time with a different tag. The number is then compared  60  to the allowed/override list  49  for the particular customer company as indicated by the CN tag in the allow/override list  49 . If the number is on the allow/override list  49 , the call is completed  64 . If it is not on the allow/override list  49 , the call number is then compared  61  to the state mandated list  46 . If the call number is on the state mandated list  46 , the call is then blocked  62 . If it is not on the state mandated list  46 , the programs determines whether the private organization dip flag is at true or false  63 . If it is false, and thus the customer does not with to adhere to the private organization&#39;s requested blocking, the call is completed  64 . If, on the other hand, the private organization dip flag is true and, thus, the customer wishes to conform to the request of the private organization, the call number is then compared  65  to the private organization list  47 . If it is not on the private organization list  47 , the call is completed  64 . If, on the other hand, it is on the private organization list  47 , the call is blocked. 
     Obviously, the contents of the do-not-call database  26 - 29  must be updated as the underlying information changes. At present, except for Alaska, the states issue new state mandated databases quarterly. The federally required do-no-call list  48  changes daily as people indicate they do not desire a customer company to call them again. The private organization lists  47  are periodically updated, as are allow/override lists. New customer companies are added to the system. All these changes require that the customer identification list  45 , the federally required do-not-call list  48  and the customer override/allow list  49  be updated accordingly. In order to keep the redundant do-not-call databases  28  and  29  current, the databases are updated daily with information received from the customers and as received with regard to information such as state mandated lists of do-not-call numbers. 
     In order to accomplish this result, a separate updating do-not-call database  70  is maintained on an updating computer (not shown) maintained by the service provider. As seen in FIG. 5, the updating do-not-call database  70  is composed of a number of lists which are periodically updated as new information becomes available. One of the component lists is the customer identification list  71  corresponding to the customer identification list  45  contained on the control computer do-not-call database  28 . In normal operation, new customer companies are added and customer companies leave the service. Equally, existing customer companies may change telephone service, adding or subtracting telephone numbers or AuthCodes for the service. As such changes occur, they are inputted into the customer identification list  71  by the service provider to produce an updated list of telephone numbers and AuthCodes tagged with the appropriate CN. The updating do-not-call database may also contain customer demographic information  72 , such as full corporate names, addresses, telephone numbers, billing information and the like associated with each CN for use of the service provider. 
     As each state mandated list is received by the service provider, the service provider updates list  74  to include any new numbers and make any other appropriate changes in the list  74 . State mandated lists may be provided over the Internet or by CD-ROM disk, each state having its own unique protocols and software programs. Using such programs, the data may be converted to a common format for updating the state mandated lists  74 . 
     As noted above, in the control computer do-not-call database  28 , state mandated information is combined with the telephone numbers of individuals who have contacted the service provider and requested their name be placed on the list. This information is kept on a separate private individual list  75  which is combined with the state mandated list  74  to make up a single list in the control do-not-call database  28  during the transfer process of updating the control do-not-call base  28 . 
     Similarly, throughout the business day, each customer company receives do-not-call requests from individuals. The customer company stores the changes and periodically modifies federally required do-not-call list  76  maintained in the updating database  70 . List  76  is, in reality, a more current list of the federally required do-no-call list  48  forming part of do-not-call database  28 . In a like manner, customer override/allow lists may change during the day as individuals, for example, request a call from the customer company and, thus, updating do-not-call database  70  maintains an updating customer override/allow list  77 . This is a more current version of the information stored in the customer override/allow list  49  of the control computer do-not-call database  28 . Finally, the private organizations periodically update their list and such updated lists are maintained on private organization list  78  of the updating do-not-call database. This list  78  is the current list corresponding to private organization list  47  on the control computer do-not-call database. 
     Since it is important for control purposes to keep track of the customer companies changes in the updating database, a list of requested changes  73  is maintained. This historical record is contained in tables that are not necessary for operation in the control computer but must be maintained to verify that the customer has requested these changes. When the customer requests an addition, a record is added to the change request table and to the requested table in this user-interface computer. The date of the add request is part of the data entered in the change request table but not in the requested table. After verification that the requested addition has been made to the appropriate table in the control computer, the change request record in the user-interface computer is updated with the date of this addition. When the customer requests a deletion, a record is added to the change request table; however, in this case, a record is deleted from the requested table. The date of the deletion request is part of the data entered in the change request table but not in the requested table. After verification that the requested deletion has been made to the appropriate table in the control computer, the change request record in the user-interface computer is updated with the date of this deletion. This enables the customer to determine, at any time, which changes have been requested in which customer lists. The customer can also determine which changes have been verified as being written in the control computer by looking at the date of the change. If the change has not occurred in the control computer, the date appears as blank; otherwise, the date of the verification of the change appears. Records in the change request tables are never deleted in order to maintain an audit trail of requested changes. 
     As noted above, the lists  71  through  78  forming the updating do-not-call database are updated in a number of different fashions depending on the nature of the information. Customer identification lists  71  are inputted directly in the updating computer by the service provider as would customer demographic information  72 . Equally, state mandated lists are normally supplied by the state on CD-ROM in a number of different protocols each having their own associated software. Thus, in order to make a list  74  the service provider would normally have to use each of the separate types of software to transfer the information to a common format where such information would be integrated. Similarly, private individuals requesting the service provider place them on a do-not-call list would be inputted into its separate list  75  by the service provider which is then integrated in the control computer&#39;s database  28 ]. 
     However, the federally required do-not-call list  76  and customer override/allow lists  77  are a product of the individual customer&#39;s business and are periodically changed during the day. It has been found that the best way for customer companies to forward information to the updating do-not-call database  70  is by means of the Internet. 
     FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of the method used to upload information from individual customers for alteration of the federally required do-not-call list  76  and the customer override/allow list  77 . A similar program can be used with connection of updating the private organization list  78  and other lists where appropriate. 
     Each customer is assigned a username and three passwords at initial set up. The passwords permit the customer to logon to the server and read data (logon/read password), add data to their “Do Not Call” or Add/Override lists (add password), and delete data from their “Do Not Call” or Add/Override lists (delete password). As seen in FIG. 7, to update the updating do-not-call database with the latest customer company information, the customer company logs on to the Internet  80  and loads the subscriber web page  81 , enters the customer name and password  82 . 
     Once the customer is accepted onto the system by entering his correct logon/read password, a page of options on a main menu is sent to the customer. This company-specific page shows the company name and other pertinent data to the customer. The data is read from the database by searching for the username and reading the customer&#39;s corresponding Customer Number (CN). The only data that the customer is permitted to see is that which is tagged by the CN that is associated with the company&#39;s username. If the customer enters a username or password that is not in the database, or does not correspond with each other in the database, an error page is sent to the customer and no data is displayed. The customer cannot obtain access to unauthorized data on any page because the CN retrieved from the database at logon is used to validate the customer&#39;s right to have the page loaded in his internet browser. The validation is in the form of a cookie that is placed on the customer&#39;s hard disk and lasts only for as long as the customer&#39;s session lasts. When the session ends, the cookie disappears. The customer must enter a valid password to have the cookie placed on his machine. If it is not the correct password the customer is brought back to the subscriber web page  81  and asked to enter his name and password  82  again. 
     The main menu displays options to add or delete numbers from the customer&#39;s “Do Not Call” list or from the customer&#39;s Add/Override list. There are also options to display or download any customer list. If the customer has entered a valid add password in addition to a valid username and read/logon password, requests to add a number to one of his lists will be permitted. If the customer has entered a valid delete password in addition to a valid username and read/logon password, requests to delete a number from one of his lists will be permitted. If it is the correct password, the customer is asked to select a list which it desires to update  84 . The caller is then presented with an appropriate web page for entry of the data and so enters the data  85 . Entry may be by hand, by forwarding a completed file or by other means. Then the data  85  is reviewed to see if it is in a valid format  86 . If it is not in a valid format, the customer is sent back to reenter the data  85 . If it is in a valid format, it is then entered  87  into the updating do-not-call database  70 . The customer is then queried whether there are any more lists to update  88 . If so, the customer picks the next list to update  89  and enters the appropriate data  85 . If there are no further lists, the customer breaks the Internet connection  90 . The updating do-not-call database is periodically transferred to all control computer do-not-call databases, usually once a day at a time traffic would be at a minimum. 
     FIG. 8 is a flow diagram in the process of updating the control computer do-not-call database by the information contained in the updating do-not-call database  90 . First, the Internet site for receiving updating information from the customers is closed  91 . The information in the updating database  70  is then bulk copied for transfer  92  and the Internet site is reestablished to allow inputting of data for the next updating cycle  93 . The files are then formatted  94  to correspond to the control computer do-not-call database. This may include reorganization and integration of files such as the state mandated lists with the individual lists  94 . The control computer database  28  and  29  are replaced with the data from the updating database  70 . 
     It is understood that the present embodiments described above are to be considered as illustrative and not restrictive. It will be obvious to those skilled in the art to make various changes, alterations and modifications to the invention described herein. For example, while particular lists have been discussed in the body of this disclosure, other lists may be included or the databases may comprise entirely different lists than those set forth in the specification. The lists are to be considered illustrative and not restrictive. To the extent that these variations, modifications and alterations depart from the scope and spirit of the appended claims, they are intended to be encompassed therein.