The FCC's Robocall Plan sounds terribly familiar

Despite high-profile arrests and protocols with malicious names, the plague of automated calls remains indomitable. On Wednesday, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Ajit Pai, criticized a new proposal aimed at seriously reducing the problem. Stop us if you've ever heard this one.

At first sight, Pai's proposal seems attractive. This would allow operators to block automated calls by default, rather than on an opt-in basis. If you want an even more severe blocking, you can choose to use your contact list as a whitelist in the proposal by returning any number you do not already know. In addition, it would be the responsibility of operators to apply the "SHAKEN" and "STIR" standards, which will make it easier to identify calls from falsified telephone numbers. You know, those who are strangely so close to yours.

"This is not an easy problem to solve, and we must always think about what we can do more," Pai wrote in a blog post announcing the proposal. The FCC will vote on the issue on June 6th.

These are all basically good ideas. But these are not new ideas and Pai's proposal does not seem to offer solutions to what has made these rules difficult to apply in the past. And while they would almost certainly help to improve the nightmare of automated calls – assuming they spend the next month – they will not stop it altogether. In fact, they can create new headaches along the way.

Without knowing the exact wording of the proposed rule, it is difficult to say exactly how the outline of Pai will work in practice. However, the idea that operators should block calls on behalf of consumers goes back to the FCC Tom Wheeler, who in 2016 had proposed that.

"It seems to follow President Pai's usual pattern of taking things that the Obama administration had done, sorting out the serial numbers and trying to take credit for them," said Harold Feld, vice-president. Chief Executive Officer of the Public Knowledge Nonprofit Group. "There is a certain chutzpah to have passed the previous government in a passionate campaign to undermine every thing, and the dissidence of every order, to now try to pretend that these are your own initiatives and take credit for them. "

Nevertheless, the carriers argued that the FCC had to clarify whether it could legally implement the automated call blocking on an optional basis, after a court challenge to Wheeler's rule had left this doubt unsure. The resolution of the issue could prompt the authorities to act. What is less clear is its effectiveness.

"Suppose this rule allows telephone companies to apply a call blocking technology that blocks all fraudulent calls. That would be great, "said Margot Saunders, Senior Counsel for the National Consumer Law Advocacy Group. "What will the callers say about this, though?" Because the law does not prohibit the usurpation of the appellants' identity. It forbids the impersonation of the appellant with the intent to defraud. "

So yes, you can expect to see fewer incoming calls coming from numbers that strangely resemble yours. But as Saunders notes, this is just a type of automated call. If this line of attack is cut, bad actors can still buy legitimate phone numbers by the hundreds, if not thousands, to run their scams.

"Historically, once a technique stops working, the bad guys simply adopt a different technique," says Alex Quilici, CEO of YouMail, a third-party service offering automated call blocking. "This should help people with regard to the number of automated calls that go through and disturb them, but I'm not sure that it reduces the actual volume of ongoing automated calls. We saw it when "scams" and other labels came out of carriers – and suddenly, everyone organized more automated calls.

Consumer advocates are also wondering who will pay exactly for this. Digging a gap against automated calls is not cheap, and positioning it as an unsubscribe service could possibly simply add another automatic line item to your monthly bill. "I strongly suspect that what carriers really want is an ability, whether you like it or not, to charge an automated call blocking fee on your bill and charge you for it." says Feld. "There is no economic incentive for carriers to improve the blocking of automated calls. As with many things, like 911 or emergency services, it's a cost that pays no profit unless you get permission to add a fee. "

Yes, in this case, you can opt out if you wish, and at least you will get fewer automated calls as part of the trading. But consider how often you look at your mobile phone bill and how often, and remember that all of the solutions that are currently available will help solve the problem of automated calls but will not solve it entirely. The calculation suddenly does not look so simple.

The good news is that those who spend their days mired in the nightmare of automated calls generally agree that Pai's proposal is a good and important step. But the context matters. These are solutions that have made their way for years and promise at best incomplete results. It's absolutely better than nothing. But that's still not what you deserve.

More great cable stories