Slipping software onto users' personal computers that tied them to premium rate phone lines without the users' knowledge or consent has gotten Internet sex company PB Communications slapped with a £10,000 fine (US$18,000 ) for their trouble, by the Independent Committee for the Supervision of Standards of Telephone Information Services, the British regulator for premium-rate telecommunications services.
"Members of the public complained about an online adult entertainment service because the dialer software used appeared to download icons and set a premium rate number as the default in the dial-up software without their knowledge or consent," the ICSTIS said announcing the actions. "This took unfair advantage of the complainants, and resulted in a large number of unauthorized and long calls."
PB Communications has also been hit with a six-month ban on access to its services.
Over 370 computer users reportedly complained that PB installed the software, which the company denied happening because it claimed the software could not install itself or become the default phone line connection without a user's consent. The company also denied calls could be made without user consent, saying the calls could only be done if the user agreed to a disclaimer, set up a personal identification number code, and accepted directly the cost of the calls.
But PB acknowledged there had been problems with call cutoffs, and said they'd refund complaining users whose calls went over a maximum £20 (US$36.60) limit.
Earlier this week, ICSTIS had slapped six other companies – Vertical Media, Fast Way Holdings, Litmud Ltd., Indiano Communications, Greenbay Ltd., and Quartel Ltd., all based overseas – with fines of £75,000 each (US$91,600) for sending unsolicited text messages, unsolicited phone calls, and leaving automated "missed calls" on mobile phones. ICSTIS said those acts were meant to trick people into calling premium rate numbers claiming prizes that didn't exist or were well below what was promised.
"The case is of particular concern as the six companies all have the same UK agent operating on their behalf – a company called Smile Telecom, based in Bury – and all have the same mailing address," said ICSTIS director George Kidd. "We have instructed redress to be paid to those affected, but Smile Telecom has refused to compensate complainants unless requested to do so by its six clients."
