Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008To the Commissioners,I agree with efforts to curb unsolicited bulk email. However, I am concerned aboutthe proposed requirement for small marketers, like myself, to maintainSuppression lists.There are so many problems and obstacles associated withthis idea, I have no idea how I can comply with the rules. So much damage will be done to businesses and the proposed rules will not shield consumers from legitimate vendors that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully.Requirement of the use of suppression lists will seriously damage many of the legitimate publications 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. Which by the way is done through the use of double opt-in processes.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 to consumers, because of the problem of properly knowing their intent when they unsubscribe from a list. On top of that, these suppression lists create nothing but a larger and more exclusive mailing list for illegalspammers, leading to more spam instead of less.Spammers will not be held accountable for their actions because they are beyond reach. While legitimate small home businessmen like myself who are reputable, follow the rule of law and don?t transmit offensive material (i.e. adult or hate) will suffer draconian penalties for a breach of law that is not possible to follow.I was quite surprised at the potential problems thisruling could involve, and urge you in the strongestpossible terms to reconsider its implementation in lightof these problems,Respectfully,Andrew H HunterCEO www.wealthnet.bizTalk to Andy NOW, LIVE!http://webcast.worldprofit.com/live/wealthnetmailto:*REDACTED PERSONAL INFORMATION*