What (who) is pseudodict-a-phone - definition

TELECOMMUNICATIONS COURT CASE

Hush-a-Phone; Hush-A-Phone decision; Hush-a-Phone v. FCC; Hush-a-Phone v. United States; Hush-A-Phone v. United States

pseudodict-a-phone

When Steve calls someone, at all hours of the night, to talk to them about an internet site.
I would have got to sleep, but I got a pseudodict-a-phone.

Hush-A-Phone

PRIVACY ENHANCING TELEPHONE DEVICE

Hush-a-Phone; Hush-A-Phone decision; Hush-a-Phone v. FCC; Hush-a-Phone v. United States; Hush-A-Phone v. United States

The Hush-A-Phone was a device designed to attach to the transmitter of a telephone to reduce noise pollution and increase privacy. Sold by the Hush-A-Phone company, the device was frequently described in its commercial advertisements as "a voice silencer designed for confidential conversation, clear transmission and office quiet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush-A-Phone

Light Phone

AMERICAN TECH STARTUP

Light (phone); The Light Phone; Light Phone I; Light Phone 1; Light Phone II; Light Phone 2; LightPhone

The Light Phone is a brand of mobile phones by Light; a startup company in Brooklyn, New York that creates technology products advertised as "designed to be used as little as possible". The Light Phone was conceived as a reaction against problematic smartphone use, with the discussion of apps and services such as email, social media, and web browsers being a key focus of the brand's production and marketing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Phone

Wikipedia

Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States

Hush-A-Phone v. United States, 238 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1956) was a seminal ruling in United States telecommunications decided by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hush-A-Phone Corporation marketed a small, cup-like device which mounted on the speaking party's microphone, reducing the risk of conversations being overheard and increasing sound fidelity for the listening party. At the time, AT&T had a near-monopoly on America's phone system, even controlling the equipment attached to its network. In this era, Americans had to lease equipment from "Ma Bell" or use approved devices. At this time Hush-A-Phone had been around for 20 years without any issues. However, when an AT&T lawyer saw one in a store window, the company decided to sue on the grounds that anything attached to a phone could damage their network.

AT&T, citing the Communications Act of 1934, which stated in part that the company had the right to make changes and dictate "the classifications, practices, and regulations affecting such charges," claimed the right to "forbid attachment to the telephone of any device 'not furnished by the telephone company.'"

Initially, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled in AT&T's favor. It found that the device was a "foreign attachment" subject to AT&T control and that unrestricted use of the device could, in the commission's opinion, result in a general deterioration of the quality of telephone service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States