Comments:

My comment is from the position of web designer/developer. I personally do not have a requirement to send email marketing to my clients or prospective clients... however... ALL of my clients - who are all legitimate, conscientious business people, DO use email marketing to some extent - either in the form of email newsletters, product/service updates & annoucements, or request-only autoresponders.These elements of their marketing strategies are VITAL to their success.Each of my clients who uses these marketing vehicles has paid close attention to meeting and exceeding requirements for OPT-IN lists - we use double confirmation systems, and always, always always include unsubscribe information with every email. The development of supression lists puts their very livlihood in to jeopardy. These are SMALL business people - the lifeblood of any economy. They are often only surviving because they HAVE the access to affordable marketing tools such as EMAIL.I don't suspect the government ever thought to enact a plan of this scope when it comes to flyers in my post box? That would be ridiculous. I am expected to live with junk mail on paper, which wastes millions of trees each year... or put a sign on my mail box saying "no flyers please"... That's precisely how we're currently dealing with junk EMAIL... it's not perfect, but it's 100% better than the concept of supression lists which basically puts useful, realistic email marketing out of the reach of the majority of small business/home business owners. The costs associated with maintaining lists with integrity is already high - just in time alone, never mind the technology required to do it effectively. The damage to the measurability of marketing effectiveness will go right out the window.The practice of people who engage in SPAMMING by currently "harvesting" email addresses from practically anywhere, and using them with impunity is not going to be thwarted by this new rule. They will find new and better ways around it.Where the process needs to be stopped is in the SALE & DISTRIBUTION of email lists.If it became illegal to purchase email addresses, and there were any possible way to enforce that, then a difference may begin to show... I sincerely doubt there is any way to enforce it.Another option would be devising a way to charge for the delivery of commercial email - the same way that the post office charges for delivering advertising flyers... again... not a simple task.Perhaps legislating that all ISP's must provide spam detection services with user-configurable black and white lists, and email address encryption, as STANDARD would help?But then there's the fact that such a huge proportion of spam originates outside of North America... how do you stop that? you can't.So this process is really using up valuable government & consumer time. You can't legislate integrity or good business practice. There will always be those looking to make a fast buck or serve their own ego, regardless of the consequences or third-party affects.Making anti-spam tools more widely and affordably available would make an inroad.Legislating that the anti-virus companies provide their basic protection free to consumers would be another good step.Maybe all that can happen is making the delete button on the standard keyboard bigger.Thanks for reading.I'm sure you'll consider all the ramifications of this issue before a concrete and final law is defined.