Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008To the Commissioners,I'm just starting to learn internet marketing. I was injured five years ago by a Physician who did the wrong proceedure on my spine resulting in a broken back. A week before court my expert witnesses backed out of testimony. This was told to me at the very beginning that this could happen.I have had to train myself on the computer, and would like to have the ability to make money to pay my bills thru online marketing. If this goes thru I will not be able to do that. No one will. Please consider this very carefully. I see it as "adding insult to injury" if this act is implement.I do however applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email. However, I am concerned about the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain suppression lists.There are so many problems and costs associated with this idea, and so much damage done to consumers and businesses alike, that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully.Requirement of the use of suppression lists willseriously damage many of the legitimatepublications available on the net. My specific concern is for harm to publishers who require permission from the consumer prior to adding them to any list.They're not who CAN-SPAM was designed to put out of business, but this requirement will very likely have that effect.There's also the potential for significant harm toconsumers, because of the problem of properly knowing their intent when they unsubscribe from a list. On top of that, these suppression lists could easily fall into the hands of spammers, leading to more spam instead of less.I was quite surprised at the potential problems thisruling could involve, and urge you in the strongestpossible terms to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems.Respectfully,Judy AitkenPortland, Oregon