| Comment Number: | 522418-10576 |
| Received: | 7/16/2006 6:01:20 PM |
| Organization: | None to date |
| Commenter: | Langley |
| State: | NV |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
I beseech you to reconsider passage of rule 16 CFP Part 4370, and any further intrusion into the business practices of online MLM businesses. My reason is set forth. I do not yet operate an online business but am currently researching several opportunities. As an adult, and business entrepreneur, I consider it MY RESPONSIBILITY to do my own due diligence, not yours. Further, I see nothing constitutionally that grants to any unelected, appointed officials the responsibility of preventing the exercise of my free will to take "calculated risks" regarding any business venture I choose to enter into, and implement your own arbitrary dictates and controls with the intention of "preventing fraud" against me. As an entrepreneur, I do not need any additional legal "protection". There are currently thousands of interstate commerce laws, which govern online business practices and address fraudulent business practices, and offer the legal remedies available in the event that harm should arise. As tax payer, I see no need to consider passage of rule 16 CFP Part 4370. If laws are all it takes to prevent fraud, then there would be no fraud with the thousands of laws against it. It is my responsibility to know the laws and business practices within my state, as well as the interstate commerce laws and international business laws. Should harm result, then I am aware of the exsisiting applicable law for the remedy. According to law, it is the individuals responsibility to be aware of current law, to abide by it and use the appropriate methods for redress if harmed. Quite frankly, I find it most offensive that every time I turn around some unelected official is looking to "protect" me from something or someone. When do we begin to take responsibility for ourselves?? Also, another deleterious result of your proposal would decrease the tax base that is provided by the small businesses. In closing, I can confidently say that I feel more than adequately protected by the existing laws pertaining to fraud, and see no need to waste more of my tax paying dollars implementing yet another law on top of yet another, ad infinitum addressing fraud. Sincerely, Mrs. Langley