Comments:

It's evident that the recently passed law has not reduced the volume of unwanted email. I'm not a big supporter of blanket "no-call" type regulations. However, I understand the thought behind these type regulations. There may be other alternatives to ?blanket, no-spam mandates.? It would be nice to see a ?no spam? regulation where consumers can opt-out of spam but where the person sending the e-mail is strictly forbidden from passing on the address of the person opting out of the spam. I have had situations where I've requested an opt-out only to be deluged with new spams from similar groups. Plainly worded and obviously placed "opt in" agreements at websites should be mandated. Harvesting information, such as purchasing habits, personal interests, tracking, etc, from an individual?s computer should be prohibited. This should also include placing of programs on an individual?s computer without their express knowledge and permission. Any permission should require a plainly worded and easily understandable format that the average person can interpret. Any and all software installed on an individual?s computer should include an uninstall procedure that completely and entirely removes the program if the consumer so desires its removal at a later date. I believe that one of the most effective ways of controlling spam and similar communications would be a simple requirement that eliminates the ability to send any electronic communication without a valid contact person?s name, return address and phone number. IE, if I send someone an e-mail, I should be required to include my real name, address and phone number in that communication. To further restrict commercial mailers that are sending millions of spam messages, they should be required to supply hot-line phone numbers that are answered by live operators, 24 hours a day, and that all calls must be resolved by a live person within two to five minutes of the call being placed. While this may sound drastic and expensive, consider the expense to consumers and corporations who are attempting to deflect these unwanted spam messages. A caveat to my thought about providing true and verifiable identity would be to extending this requirement to chat rooms and forums on the internet. Wouldn?t this be an easy way to root out the predators that are becoming so prevalent? I?m against the thought of eliminating the ability or controlling a legitimate business person who is trying to promote and grow their business in a legitimate way. I?m also against anyone contacting me where I don?t have a way to easily contact that person to let them know that I?m not interested in further communication from them. Thanks, *REDACTED PERSONAL INFORMATION*