Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I am a legitimate Internet marketer and as such I am concerned about the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain suppression lists. I am a male over 50 year old who has been laid off from his job. I turned to the Internet to make an income to pay my mortgage, the grocery bills, my TAXES, etc. Having tried to find a job, I have noticed (this is the second time this has happened) it is much tougher to find a job when you are 35+ years old. As I said, I am a legitimate Internet marketer. I abide by the the CAN-SPAM Law as do all of of my colleagues who are teaching me the business. I use double opt-in, again, as do all of my colleagues who are teaching me the business. Although an Internet business is cheaper to operate than a brick and mortar business, there are still enough expenses associated with an Internet business. The expense associated with maintaining a suppression list could cause me discontinue my Internet business. And for those who do not abide by the CAN-SPAM law, this will just be another law for them to get around and break. It will only push legitimate Internet marketers out of business. I believe the only way to decrease spam is prosecute those in violation of the CAN_SPAM Law. I urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider the implementation of this suppression list law in light of its cost to the many legitimate Internet marketers. Respectfully, Robert J. Wardynski New York, USA