Can AT&T Block Access To Numbers It Doesn't Like? > No 900?

reply to David

Re: No 900?

In order for conference participants to reach our service, each one must call a telephone number. For Reservationless Standard and Web-Scheduled Standard conferences this number may be local or long distance, depending on their location. The only costs for these type of conference calls are whatever long distance rates are charged by each individual conference participant's long distance carrier (Sprint, MCI, AT&T, etc.). We do not require the use of any specific carrier, nor do we know what rates you pay on your calling plan.

well for the last decade and possibly even longer I know if local ILECs (not just at&t mind you) got enough complaints from a out of state number they could block it and provide evidence and notice as to why they blocked it.

from what it seems both sides are not innocent in this regard, if the above on what they did was true.

What would the complaint be? I called a long distance number and I'm not happy about the cost? I'm surprised the telco has the authority to block a number because folks were possibly mislead into making an LD call. It would seem this authority should lie in the state's AG office and that an investigation would be warranted to determine if the public was mislead. And I don't think the AG can just declare such a fact. Doesn't the AG have to sue and win a court case?

If ISPs challenge the RIAA with having proper legal documentation before releasing an MP3 downloader name, blocking a number based on consumer complaints seems legally risky. However since the service is free, I don't know what freeconference.com would claim they are losing -- unless they sell ads on their web site and claim that by blocking their number, it damages their credibility.