privacy interests. 

42

  It further noted that  such a solicitation can be deemed to be invited or 

permitted by a subscriber in light of the business relationship. 

43

  Indeed, the FCC expressly 

concluded that  any telephone subscriber who releases his or her telephone number has, in effect, 

given express prior consent to be called by the entity to which the number was released. 

44

These conclusions are equally applicable to the TSR.  Calls to existing customers do not 

adversely affect privacy interests and, therefore, do not lend themselves easily to the forms of the 

abuse the proposed national registry requirements are intended to protect.  This consideration 

provides a third, independent justification for creating an established business relationship 

exemption to the proposed national do not call requirements. 

4. 

The Burdens on Legitimate Industry Outweigh the Risk that a 

Narrow Established Business Relationship Exemption Could be Exploited for Fraudulent 

Purposes. 

The only potential justification articulated by the FTC for declining to adopt an 

 established business relationship  exemption to the TSR is that such an exemption may be 

 unworkable in the context of telemarketing fraud. 

45

  Specifically, the NPRM surmises that such 

an exemption may  enable fraudulent telemarketers who were able to fraudulently make an 

initial sale to a customer to continue to exploit that customer without being subject to the Rule. 

46

This concern dates back to 1995,

47

 when the central purpose of the Rule was to prevent 

42

TCPA Report and Order

, 7 F.C.C.R. at 8770. 

43

Id

. 

44

Id.

45

NPRM

 at 4532. 

46

Id

. 

47

See

NPRM Proposing the Original TSR

, 60 Fed. Reg. 30406, 30423 (proposed June 8, 1995) (codified at 16 

C.F.R. pt. 310). 

18