You have to pay for that service, and that was one of their issues. Here they are, interested in trying to be as private as possible, and it's costing them money to do so. It had never been brought to my attention—since I don't mind being in the phone book—that this is people's information. It's not their SIN number or something you could go to the bank and use, but it would be a start.
No one has challenged this in the courts that you know of? Can anybody answer that question?