Comments:

re 16 cfr part 3l6 - project R4ll008 RIN 3084-AA96 - CAN Spam - public comment - page 4 - establish a do not spam list - some people do not want any spam page 5 - last paragraph take out the word "expand or". page 7 - If one sender has opted out, the message should not go. I also think that all sections must be clarified here and now in this rule - not left to be clarified at some future time. page 8 - a valid physical address must be given not an anonymous post office box - we have too many fly by nights with post office boxes - here today and gone tomorrow. page 9 - e mails identifiable from the first line should be mandated. next to last para should look for answers to how to monitor spam from other nations, which is already far too prevalent. How will we stop other nations from illegally sending spam? It is clear they have reasons to send spam Protecting children is of the utmost importance with this rule. page ll - if the message seeks to sell any product at all, it is a commercial message. Sending a paid for newsletter is not commercial, unless it wants you to re-up. page 12 - Businesses for profit only send commercial mail - it is not ever "friendly" mail. It always has the purpose to sell. (2) - this law will need tweaking. page l3 - (9) - that is commercial since it is a new ploy. c(l) is ok. c(3) the cost of dealing with endless aggravation and tieing up a personal machine for their own profit - that ends up in continual stress and ill health for the person harassed. It is harassment to sell to people who do not want to be sold to. c(4) - many companies never update currently - they will have to be forced to do so. page l4 - e(l) - all four senders would be the sender. If the victim has opted out of one, the message cannot be sent from any of the 4. e(3)(a) - yes page l5 - (e) stop all unsolicited e mails. 4. a post office address is not a valid address. nobody works there or lives there. they are shams to hide behind. page l6. A reward system not be necessary. page l7 - I2 - labelling is effective 6 - standardization would be a good thing. Also where is the part of this proposed rules that mentions fines for those who violate. I would like to see a fine of $50,000 for the first offense. $l00,000 for second offense. Jail for 5 years and seizure of assets for third offense. We need to get this harassment of people to stop. *REDACTED PERSONAL INFORMATION*