@newtondial#170270 welcome back 
Yup, I’m still here haha. Markiemm has left as there was some dispute on how the site was administrated. He’s definitely not a double agent. I’ve known and sometimes talked to him on voice chat for a long time. Maybe that company got your decoy phone number from you calling them? Gonna look into that company :o Are they robocallers? Is there a forum thread?
>
@FattyMatty#170309 There is no limit to the number of phones you can own. The problem is obviously monthly costs involved. However, the TCPA does not apply to VOIP services like Text Now or Google voice, etc. The reason the TCPA even exists is because people could conceivably have to pay money per call or per text message. You have been “damaged” in terms of financial outlay for each unsolicited contact.
As I understand it, damages also factor in the nuisance value of the call, not just any financial outlay.
There was this from 2017, but that then looks to have been contradicted by this in 2019.
A SIP number set up through GoTrunk, to pick a random example, is also slightly different to a TextNow account, or something similar.
As an aside, the US system is weird, and seems to have been set up as a way of making lawyers rich. The UK, for example, has a system called the Telephone Preference Service which is sort of similar, except that a complaint is made to a government agency and if they have sufficient evidence, it is the government, not the complainant, who takes the offender to court and issues a fine. Australia does something similar. The UK also has a something similar for junk mail too called the Mail Preference Service. It’s a shame the US doesn’t (I’m looking at you, US Automotive Protection Services).
Does this work if you are a minor? It’d be great to earn a bit o’ cash, but i doubt I can collect/file a case if I am under 18.
An example of a demand letter that appears to have been successful.
http://www.fighttelemarketing.com/silverleaf.html
>
@Foreign_Hacker#170323 There was this from 2017, but that then looks to have been contradicted by this in 2019.
>
>
A SIP number set up through GoTrunk, to pick a random example, is also slightly different to a TextNow account, or something similar.
Ok so this is very interesting! So the case in 2019 says that a number should be used for 'wireless services' that would indeed include TextNow to be covered by the TCPA since I can use the TextNow app on mobile to have an always-on call service. TextNow even offers its calls and data plans just like a regular SIM card, just in form of an app I guess.
I think courts have to include VoIP numbers into the TCPA also because the argument in the 2017 case was that the call used VoIP technology. These days, in many countries VoLTE and Vo-WiFi/WiFi calling is replacing traditional 2G network calling by default. Many smartphones support it and the carriers are implementing it for more efficient bandwidth usage and higher audio quality because better codecs can be used. So if that's the case, even regular mobile numbers will use VoIP technology.