City Hall
Council Adopts Revised Phone-Book Regulations
By an 8-1 vote, the city council just approved new restrictions on phone book distributors that would license phone-book distributors, create a city-run "opt-out" list for people who don't want to receive yellow pages phone books, and fine companies that deliver phone books to people who have said they don't want to receive them.
As I reported on Monday, the council initially planned to vote on the legislation, sponsored by council member Mike O'Brien, last week, but postponed the vote a week after groups like the Greater Seattle Business Association, which produces a directory of gay-friendly Seattle businesses, might fall under the proposal's definition of "yellow pages." The revised version of the bill would apply only to companies that distribute more than four tons' worth of directories annually, and would exempt groups that distribute books to their members or to people who specifically request them.
In what could be an indication of the phone book lobby's strategy in a potential lawsuit against the city, phone-book company representatives called the legislation a violation of privacy, a burden on taxpayers, and discriminatory. "The ordinance states that I'm required to turn my listings over to the city, which is a violation of their privacy rights," said Maggie Stonecipher, a representative of the Dex One yellow-pages company, which runs its own opt-out system. "Our privacy policies prevent us from sharing the information that is called for in the ordinance."
Some observers speculated that waiting an additional week could make the city more vulnerable to a lawsuit by phone-book companies, because the companies could use the legislative record to argue that the council's real goal was singling out phone-book companies, not trying to reduce waste.
In his office this afternoon, however, O'Brien said he thinks the extra week improved the legislation.
"I think the lawyers will be looking everywhere in the record to make a case," O'Brien said. But by focusing the new regulations on phone-book distributors, rather than producers, he said, "I think we've actually made [the legislation] stronger."
Only council member Jean Godden voted against the ordinance, because, she said, "the bill still requires a license to distribute printed material, and I think that might be a slippery slope" toward licensing other printed materials, such as newspapers.
As I reported on Monday, the council initially planned to vote on the legislation, sponsored by council member Mike O'Brien, last week, but postponed the vote a week after groups like the Greater Seattle Business Association, which produces a directory of gay-friendly Seattle businesses, might fall under the proposal's definition of "yellow pages." The revised version of the bill would apply only to companies that distribute more than four tons' worth of directories annually, and would exempt groups that distribute books to their members or to people who specifically request them.
In what could be an indication of the phone book lobby's strategy in a potential lawsuit against the city, phone-book company representatives called the legislation a violation of privacy, a burden on taxpayers, and discriminatory. "The ordinance states that I'm required to turn my listings over to the city, which is a violation of their privacy rights," said Maggie Stonecipher, a representative of the Dex One yellow-pages company, which runs its own opt-out system. "Our privacy policies prevent us from sharing the information that is called for in the ordinance."
Some observers speculated that waiting an additional week could make the city more vulnerable to a lawsuit by phone-book companies, because the companies could use the legislative record to argue that the council's real goal was singling out phone-book companies, not trying to reduce waste.
In his office this afternoon, however, O'Brien said he thinks the extra week improved the legislation.
"I think the lawyers will be looking everywhere in the record to make a case," O'Brien said. But by focusing the new regulations on phone-book distributors, rather than producers, he said, "I think we've actually made [the legislation] stronger."
Only council member Jean Godden voted against the ordinance, because, she said, "the bill still requires a license to distribute printed material, and I think that might be a slippery slope" toward licensing other printed materials, such as newspapers.
Filed under
Share
Show Comments
