Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, Thanks for 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 that can be done to consumers and businesses alike, that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully. It is truly unfortunate that we are bombarded daily with so much unsolicited email. However, in our eagerness to address this problem, we must make sure that we do not cripple legitimate businesses with this, or any other law. We should not, as is often the case, hurt the innocent in order to punish the guilty. Email contact is helping American business to reduce costs, which helps with productivity and increases hiring. The proposed requirement for suppression lists will take away the benefit of increased productivity that the Internet is designed to provide, and is providing us. 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. These businesses are not whom the CAN-SPAM Act 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 am 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, Reginald Niles Santa Clara County, California