Comments:

A National Do Not Email Registry should be implemented. There should be an easy method of providing a regulatory agency with the SCAM or SPAM e-mail so that action may be taken against the sender, both the company and the person originating the e-mail. The Act must have good effective enforcement that will prevent SPAM e-mails from flooding the network and e-mail servers. Subject line labeling practices do not seem to be followed by the SPAM e-mails I receive. I still get a lot of SPAM e-mail without good sender e-mail addresses. One in particular that arrives on an all too regular address has a blank sender. Senders of SPAM use special characters in the subject line, changing the text from a legitimate word to something like "v|i|c|o|d|e|n" or "v@lue", just to defeat SPAM filtering. These changes make it difficult to establish a filter which would filter the SPAM. These practices should also be addressed in the Act. There still seems to be a lot of "address spoofing" or falsifying the sending IP address and\or path information from the sender to the recipient making it difficult, if not impossible, to trace the e-mail back to the sender. This should be specifically addressed by the Act, if it is not already addressed. ISP's and e-mail service providers do not seem too concerned when SPAM or SCAM e-mails are reported to them. I still receive a large number of "Nigerian Scam"-type e-mails, those asking for "assistance" in getting large sums of illegally acquired money out of a, generally, third-world country. If a consumer has “opted out” from receiving commercial email from a particular company, and then receives a subsequent commercial email containing an ad for this company as well as ads for three other companies, does this violate the Act? If so, who has committed the violation? ... Yes the Act has been violated by the party who initiated the email message, but who did not receive the opt-out request. The sender must have received the e-mail addresses to which the SPAM e-mail is sent from some source. Since the sender of unsolicited emails is acting for the company, there is obviously some contact between the company and the sender. The sender would not be sending e-mail messages advertising a company or product without some relationship, from which that sender benefits, with the company whose products are being advertised. The company should be responsible for those persons acting for them by sending unsolicited commercial e-mail advertising that company or that companys product(s).