Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Cellphones Spam

Papa John's Sued For Unwanted Pizza-Related Texts 418

jfruh writes "Nationwide pizza chain Papa John's is finding itself on the receiving end of a $250 million text spam lawsuit. From the article: 'Seattle law firm Heyrich Kalish McGuigan, representing three Papa John's customers, alleged that the pizza delivery service has sent 500,000 unwanted text messages to customers. If the court finds that Papa John's violated the U.S. Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the pizza maker could have to pay damages of $500 per text message, or US$250 million, one of the largest damage awards under the 1991 law, the law firm said. "Many customers complained to Papa John's that they wanted the text messages to stop, and yet thousands of spam text messages were sent week after week," Donald Heyrich, attorney for the plaintiffs said in a statement. "This should be a wake-up call to advertisers. Consumers do not want spam on their cell phones."'
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Papa John's Sued For Unwanted Pizza-Related Texts

Comments Filter:
  • by dosius ( 230542 ) <> on Thursday November 15, 2012 @06:50AM (#41989985) Journal

    I wouldn't call that crud pizza. Fake mozz? Hell, every pizzeria around here uses the real thing, whole-milk mozzarella.


  • The law says... (Score:5, Informative)

    by iYk6 ( 1425255 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @06:51AM (#41989987)

    The law says that you aren't allowed to spam cell phones with commercial advertisements. No opt out necessary.

  • Papa John (Score:4, Informative)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Thursday November 15, 2012 @06:52AM (#41989991)

    Just as info for those who don't know these morons.

    "Before the election Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter, a big Romney supporter, was one of the highest profile CEOs threatening layoffs and pizza price hikes (god forbid!) if Obama won. He doubled down after the election, like the Vegas man saying he’d start making layoffs and reducing hours at Papa John’s locations rather than having to provide healthcare for people working more than 30 hours per week." []

  • by bfandreas ( 603438 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @07:08AM (#41990051)
    Not to be nitpicky but proper Mozzarella is made from (European) buffalo milk. Not that cheap cow stuff.
    Not every lactation of any bovine will do for proper Mozzarella.

    But anything is better than that horrid cheese analogue they stir together from second rate fat, rotting skunks and paint.
  • Re:The law says... (Score:4, Informative)

    by houghi ( 78078 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @07:13AM (#41990081)

    In Belgium this is different. We can (and do) send commercial offers to our customers. Two things:
    1) We honor the opt-out
    2) The customer never has to pay when receiving messages (unless he is in another country and roaming is on)

  • Re:Papa John (Score:4, Informative)

    by RabidReindeer ( 2625839 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @08:30AM (#41990385)

    "...doubled down"?

    Is that the latest trendy phrase over there?

    Scott Adams [] mentioned it today, I thought he was exaggerating. Apparently not.

    Yes. You're late to the party.

    Translation: It didn't work before, so now we'll do it twice as hard.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 15, 2012 @09:13AM (#41990593)

    Actually, the FCC has a currently open comment period on how to address automated system for sending spam texts to cell phones. See

    With this Public Notice, we seek comment on the petition for an expedited clarification and
    declaratory ruling filed by Revolution Messaging, LLC.1 Revolution Messaging asks the Commission to
    clarify that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)2 and the Commission’s related rules3 apply
    to users of Internet-to-phone text messaging technology and similar technologies involving the storage
    and automatic dialing of wireless telephone numbers.4 Revolution Messaging states that such a ruling
    would make clear that Internet-to-phone text messaging technology is a type of “automatic telephone
    dialing system” under the Commission’s rules and is therefore subject to the prohibitions in the TCPA
    and the Commission’s related rules.

    Anyone can file comments urging the FCC to make clear that such systems should be considered a type of “automatic telephone dialing system” under the Commission’s rules.

    Read the full petition here:

    File comments on the FCC ECFS system, the docket number to use is "02-278". http://

    And although the deadline is close, the FCC is generally fairly liberal in allowing and considering late-filed comments.

  • Re:Papa John (Score:4, Informative)

    by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @09:16AM (#41990617) Homepage Journal

    You realize, of course, that by doing that, you're hosing the employees even further, because not only will hours be cut, but so will the number of employees.

    People won't stop buying pizza. They'll buy from other places instead, which means other places will be hiring.

    Anyhow, I don't really get the whole pizza delivery thing. Where I live, it's quicker for me to make a pizza from scratch than to order one.
    It's really not hard - if it were, those guys wouldn't be able to do it...

  • Re:Papa John (Score:4, Informative)

    by ehynes ( 617617 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @10:11AM (#41991019) Homepage
    How can it be payback? The lawsuit is being brought by a private law firm and it was certified as a class-action case by a Reagan appointee [].
  • Re:Papa John (Score:5, Informative)

    by DerekLyons ( 302214 ) <> on Thursday November 15, 2012 @11:10AM (#41991553) Homepage

    Papa John's is reacting to the new economic reality they face under the Obama regime. It's that simple. Obamacare will force them to cut hours and let people go. They know that. We know that. This has never changed since the concept was first floated. It's reality.

    Some people knew it - but many people lived under a reality distortion field that lead them to believe that there would be no consequences of any kind under the new law. Those of us who pointed out the flaws in the plan and pointed out that you couldn't alter the trajectory of billions of dollars without consequences were and are being called haters, and liars, and ignorant... and worse.
    The worst part is that Obamacare doesn't actually do anything to reform health care or control costs. It's a shell game to hide the mounting costs.
    Still, the effects of this farce are only beginning to be felt. The shell game they've been playing about funding is going to end, with a shell lifted to reveal... nothing. Expect a wave of insurance companies going under over the next decade, if they aren't bailed out to the tune of billions or trillions (which the government doesn't have). Since many underwriters and insurance companies also provide other forms of insurance, the ripple effects through the economy will be staggering.
    And those ignorant people under the reality distortion field won't understand that these consequences were as predictable as the sun rising. They simply cannot comprehend TANSTAAFL.

  • Re:Papa John (Score:5, Informative)

    by jackbird ( 721605 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @11:24AM (#41991707)

    Actually, the clusterfuck that ended up being the ACA was an attempt to get republicans on board. The actual sickly-sweet loving liberal version is single payer, like, you know, the rest of the developed world. And small business owners should be first in line to ask for it (perhaps only after large corporations with large retiree healthcare expenses), but somehow they've all been convinced it's anathema.

  • by DeadCatX2 ( 950953 ) on Thursday November 15, 2012 @01:16PM (#41992997) Journal

    About that criticism of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Baucuscare, after Senator Max Baucus of Montana, the man who *actually* wrote the law (or rather, it was Sen. Baucus' aides and lobbyists, but at least Baucuscare is less of a misnomer, since laws are not written by the executive branch))

    Mr. John Schnatter, CEO of Papa Johns, estimates that the PPACA will cost his company $5 to $8 million annually.

    In September, Papa Johns ran a campaign where they gave out two million free pizzas. The cost of these pizzas would be $24 to $32 million, estimated.

    In other words, free pizza advertising gimmicks cost about four times as much as providing health care to your employees. []

  • Re:Papa John (Score:4, Informative)

    by danheskett ( 178529 ) <> on Thursday November 15, 2012 @06:31PM (#41996651)

    > since you then turn around and basically agree with me.
    I agree with your choice of the word "shell game", except we differ in what the game is. So far the game as been for some employers and individuals to effectively steal from others - and shift the cost and risk to other people. This the shell game, and it's starting to be curbed for the first time.

    The insurance companies love it because in the short term it's a recipe for tremendous growth, by as per usual they (and you) aren't thinking about the longer term - when the shell game ends.
    So far you have not explained why insurance companies are going to go bankrupt between now and 2022.

    The money isn't coming out of thin air, and the subsidy isn't going to grow indefinitely, exactly as Medicare and Medicaid haven't
    Exactly. Medicare and Medicaid have done a far better job containing costs than the private insurance market, which have almost uniformly failed to contain costs. Medicare and Medicaid simply have price controls. Providers limit the number of patients they see from these groups, so they can see more profitable commercial or cash customers. However, they still take the others because there is still money to be made. The classic economic result of price controls - shortages. As parity is reached between these two groups - by expanding Medicare and Medicaid, and by limiting commerical payments, shortages will equalize between the two groups. Providers will once again have incentive to control costs through means other than cost inflation.

    Insurance companies have retained growth not by expanding their base, but making each successive smaller customer class more profitable at each turn. The ACA sets about to change that, and over time, it has an ok chance of succeeding - by gradually controlling prices via the IPAB, by paying for services that are only proven to be effective, and by limiting payments for procedures that are not medically sound,

    a cost that Papa John's wasn't paying - at that point, you went off into cloud cuckoo land

    This isn't cuckoo land. Every person alive can be expected to have some medical needs. For whatever reason, the US has decided that we should fund this through employer sponsored health-insurance. This is crazy, but of course, any attempt to change it is of course socialist. So we have what we have.

    Given what we have - people with either (a) government paid care (Medicare/Medicaid/Tricare/etc), (b) self-paid care, most of which ends up as bad debt, or (c) private commercial insurance. Papa John's, previously, was not insuring most of its full time workers. When these uninsured employees got sick, where do you suppose a person making $10/hr or $11/hr gets money for treatment? When one gets catastrophically sick, where do you suppose money for treatment comes from? It's not coming from insurance that Papa Johns contributes to. It's coming from those who pay - government or privately insured people. It's coming from the taxpayers.

    And's that what this guy is complaining about - having to cover the costs that others in the economy have been covering. He's been stealing a subsidy of - he claims 0.14 per pizza - by shifting healthcare costs from Papa John's as a benefit, to others in the economy. This is the shell game - of who is paying. Right now those costs are hidden and redirected to the government or to others who private insurance. For the first time, this is starting to change. Cost shifting is penalized, first in a relatively small way, but over time in escalating penalties that create incentives to no longer try to push people - especially low wage people - onto the taxpayer's back. Yes, absolutely, it will lead to higher costs for those actors who have been cost shifting. But for others, who have been absorbing the cost out of principle or charity, will reap the benefit of a newly equal playing field.

    By the way, this is why some companies support the ACA - Obamacare. Costco - for example - has offered affo

All science is either physics or stamp collecting. -- Ernest Rutherford