Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008To the Commissioners,I applaud your efforts to curb the problem ofunsolicited bulk email. However, I am concerned aboutthe proposed requirement for merchants to maintainsuppression lists.There are so many problems and costs associated withthis idea, and so much damage done to consumers andbusinesses alike, that I feel I must urge you toconsider this matter most carefully.Requirement of the use of suppression lists willseriously damage many of the legitimate publicationsavailable on the net.... those who require perissionfrom the consumer prior to adding them to any list.The use of suppression lists will force me to notifythe ezines I'm running my ads in to suppress theaddress of the person who unsubscribes, so that personwould not receive any of theses ezines, which couldwell be their favorites.If I'm reqired to notify the affiliate program Iadvertised to suppress that person's email addressfrom their lists and that person is an affiliate forone of those programs, it could cost him/her some goodaffiliate commissions.In either case, Internet Marketers' privacy policyprohibits them from sharing an opt-in's privateinformation.They're not who CAN-SPAM was designed to put out ofbusiness, but this requirement will very likely havethat effect.There's also the potential for significant harm toconsumers, because of the problem of properly knowingtheir intent when they unsubscribe from a list.I visualize this requirement as possibly increasingSPAM, and doing nothing to reduce the SPAM that isalready clogging our inboxes, since these suppressionlists could easily fall into the hands of spammers,leading to more, 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 lightof these problems,Respectfully,Norma MorarieIowa, USA