Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No.R411008The Commissioners,I Am as much concerned with SPAM as anyone. My Inbox is always full of unwanted offers from porn sites, prescription pill sites and other suspect offers. Furthermore, I am pleased that there is legislation in the USA and Europe that is going to curb the curse of unsolicited bulk mail.However, as a consumer I am concerned about the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain suppression lists. I have no problem with merchants sending me emails with offers providing I have opted-in to their mailing list. If I am not interested in any particular offer I use the delete key.There are so many problems and costs associatedwith this idea, and so much damage done toconsumers and businesses alike, that I feel I musturge you to consider this matter most carefully.Requirement of the use of suppression lists willseriously damage many of the legitimate publications available on the net. My specificconcern is for harm to publishers who requirepermission from the consumer prior to adding themto any list.They're not who CAN-SPAM was designed to putout of business, but this requirement will very likelyhave that effect. The SPAMMERS will survivebecause they don?t care about the law however.There's also the potential for significant harm toconsumers, because of the problem of properlyknowing their intent when they unsubscribe from alist. On top of that, these suppression lists couldeasily fall into the hands of spammers, leading tomore 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 inlight of these problems.Respectfully,David Knight Dagenham, Essex, United Kingdom