Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I agree with the intent to limit the amount of unsolicited bulk email we all receive. But 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. I run an affiliate program in my business and if the Act is interpreted to mean that someone opting out of one of my affiliate's lists means they mustn't ever receive any email from myself or any other affiliate of mine, the entire program becomes too complicated and costly to implement. I work for myself from home and having an affiliate program that incents people to promote my products and services (NEVER to be done using unsolicited email) is one of the most cost effective ways for the word about my business to get out. I only use opt-in lists that have an automated unsubscribe option. My affiliates agree not to send unsolicited mail and if I ever find that one is sending such mail, s/he will not be my affiliate anymore! I hope that the Act will be interpreted in such a way that spam is curbed and spammers penalized, while those of us running legitimate businesses using opt-in lists and affiliate programs are not put out of business. There's also the potential for 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 worried about 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, Margaret Champlin Rochester, NY USA