Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version


This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.


                                  STATEMENT OF


   Re:  1^st Source Information Specialists, Inc., d/b/a,
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, EB File No. EB-05-TC-059; FRN 0014762439; NAL Acct. No.

   Personal privacy is at the heart of our quality of life, as Congress
   recognized in requiring telecommunications companies to respect their
   customers' privacy. A consumer's telephone call records include some of
   the most private personal information about an individual. Not
   surprisingly, consumers were alarmed when it came to light over the past
   year that their telephone records were widely available for sale on the
   Internet, without their knowledge or approval, to anyone with an Internet
   connection and a credit card. People felt that having their incoming and
   outgoing calls available for public view was like having their personal
   diaries exposed. Consumers were outraged to find that others could learn
   about calls that might expose their business transactions, doctor
   appointments, and personal interactions.

   Strong and consistent Commission enforcement of our consumer privacy rules
   is critical to restore the protections that consumers expect and that
   Congress has mandated. This NAL takes aim at one of the apparent purveyors
   of consumers' private telephone call records for failure to comply with an
   on-going Commission investigation. LocateCell's willful and repeated
   failure to fully cooperate with the Commission's subpoena jeopardizes the
   Commission's investigation, and warrants the maximum penalty for repeated
   non-compliance with Commission orders. The Commission simply cannot
   condone failure to cooperate with an investigation that clearly safeguards
   the public interest.

   This NAL must also be part of a larger effort to address the widespread
   availability of confidential phone records, a phenomenon highlighted in
   press reports just a few months back estimating that there were dozens of
   such web sites. Shining a light on the unauthorized sale of telephone
   records may drive some of these providers off the Internet - a positive
   first step. Yet, companies like LocateCell appear to slip underground with
   disquieting ease, which may pose a real challenge for our efforts to
   assess this forfeiture, and we will need to be vigilant against the
   ability of bad actors peddling unauthorized telephone records to disappear
   and later resurface.

   Indeed, we have a lot more work to do to ensure that consumers private
   call records are adequately safeguarded. It is essential that we move
   ahead with our pending rulemaking on our consumer privacy rules for
   telephone companies. The mere fact that these records have been so readily
   available, even though telephone companies are required to have firewalls
   in place to protect consumers' private information, has raised serious
   questions about the mechanisms that are in place to safeguard the
   confidentiality of their consumers' information. So, our pending
   rulemaking proceeding gives us an important opportunity to find ways to
   tighten our rules, to ensure that phone companies are employing adequate
   safeguards, and to provide greater security for these sensitive consumer
   records. Every provider should be on notice that we are watching closely
   and will take the action necessary to protect consumers' privacy, and we
   expect them to do the same.