] The agency, Judge Nottingham wrote in the 34-page
] opinion, "has chosen to entangle itself too much in the
] consumer's decision by manipulating consumer choice and
] favoring" charitable over commercial speech. Judge
] Nottingham's assessment of the FTC registry was blunt.
] The First Amendment, he said, bars the government
] adopting laws that give a preference to one type of
] speech over another when the content isn't significantly
] different. "Because the do-not-call registry
] distinguishes between the indistinct, it is
] unconstitutional under the First Amendment," he wrote.

This may seem like a loss, but its actually a win. Congress can't allow some telemarketers to call you and not allow others to call you. Having created this thing, they are in a political situation where they have to make it happen. In this respect the only way to legally make it work is to ban all telemarketing.

I don't really understand why the telemarking industry is making this arguement. They are making things even worse for themselves in the long run.

I'm not sure I agree with this ruling, however. This isn't a ban per say. Its a system that allows people to sign up and say "I don't want that." You are forced to comply with those requests and not send this stuff to people who don't want it. Aren't people's phones an aspect of their personal privacy? Shouldn't they be able to say "stop calling me," and charge harrassment if you don't? I don't think thats the same as a speech regulation. I would like to read this decision, if anyone knows where to get it.