Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I 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 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. 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 could easily fall into the hands of spammers, leading to more spam instead of less. I was quite surprised at the potential problems this ruling could involve, and urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems, Respectfully, Cody Kahl British Columbia, Canada Personal Note: This is another law that will greatly affect the people that it shouldn't be, and will do virtually nothing to stop Spam. We all hate spam, but this is going to far. There are many ways to stop Spam, and this isn't one of them, nor will it help. We have a gun law here in Canada that is similar to this. It doesn't do anything to the actual criminals... They will get a gun regardless. But to actual law-abiding citizens that own guns, it is devastating. This is exactly what is going on here. Please, I urge you to VERY carefully consider this law. It could mean a lot of loss for non-spamming people. Best Regards, C.K.