telemarketing restrictions

Telemarketing Restrictions During Emergencies

Over the last several months, telemarketers have confronted a new reality that forces them to understand the implications of declarations of public health and other emergencies issued by local, state, and federal governmental agencies.  Various jurisdictions have telemarketing restrictions that are triggered upon such declarations, making recent months and the foreseeable future a particularly tricky time to operate a telemarketing business.

What is an example of emergency-related telemarketing restrictions?

Louisiana provides a concrete recent example of a state whose telemarketing rules of the road changed with the issuance of an emergency declaration.  In advance of the anticipated landfall of a recent hurricane, Governor John Bel Edwards declared a state of emergency.  That declaration had the effect of activating a statutory prohibition against all telemarketing in the State, with certain exceptions.  For example, some exceptions from the broad telemarketing ban are for calls made: (1) to collect a debt; (2) by approved non-profit organizations; or (3) to conduct market research.  Likewise, calls made to recipients who have expressly requested to be contacted, or with whom a business has a preexisting or prior business relationship, can also be placed, with one big caveat – the consent must have been provided within the last six months and the prior business relationship must not have been terminated more than six months before the subject call is made. 

Keeping Compliant with Emergency-Induced Telemarketing Restrictions

It is important that telemarketers work with experienced marketing attorneys to guide them through state and federal laws in order to avoid regulatory trouble. Even under ordinary business conditions, telemarketing law can be complicated and vary dramatically between jurisdictions.  These are not times of ordinary business conditions, however.  Declared public health and states of emergency have become commonplace and may continue for some time.  As a result, it is recommended to avoid placing telemarketing calls in certain jurisdictions unless you offer crucial products or services and have consulted with knowledgeable counsel concerning compliance with applicable law and regulations.

If you need assistance reviewing your telemarketing practices and procedures, please e-mail us at info@kleinmoynihan.com, or call us at (212) 246-0900.

The material contained herein is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice, nor is it a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney. Each situation is unique, and you should not act or rely on any information contained herein without seeking the advice of an experienced attorney.

Attorney Advertising

Photo by Petr Macháček on Unsplash

Similar Blog Posts:

Telemarketing in a State of Emergency

New York Enacts New Telemarketing Law

FCC Issues TCPA Compliance Ruling for School-Related Calls

Share:

David Klein

David Klein is one of the most recognized attorneys in the technology, Internet marketing, sweepstakes, and telecommunications fields. Skilled at counseling clients on a broad range of technology-related matters, David Klein has substantial experience in negotiating and drafting complex licensing, marketing and Internet agreements.

Prerecorded Voice Claims Must be Factually Supported

On November 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California issued a noteworthy decision highlighting the importance of carefully contesting a plaintiff’s prerecorded voice claims. In Davis v. Rockloans Marketplace, LLC, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, in part,finding

Read More »

Trending Topics

Blog

Prerecorded Voice Claims Must be Factually Supported

On November 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California issued a noteworthy decision highlighting the importance of carefully contesting a plaintiff’s prerecorded voice claims. In Davis v. Rockloans Marketplace, LLC, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, in part,finding

Read More »