Comments:

Honorable Commissioners: Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 I'm glad you are addressing the huge problem of unsolicited bulk email. It is a real pain. However, since I use e-mail responsibly in dealing with my customers and my associates, I have to question the proposed requirement for those like me to maintain "suppression lists". Can this be done so that costs and various problems we would have in implementing this idea be reduced to a manageable minimum? Careful, even lengthy consideration should be able to resolve most issues, but, as in the "do not fax" area, more time needs to be given to work these thorns out. Not to do so could cause severe damage to many of us who do not engage in any "bad" e-mail, but depend on good e-mail for our very livelihood. We believe that we are as considerate of the customers' rights to privacy as you are, but there is a better way to manage this issue than the proposed use of a "suppression" list in the manner proposed. It seems to be inherent in the proposed process that there also is the potential for harm to our customers who don't realize the ramifications of what they are doing when they simply unsubscribe from a list and go on the suppression list. And who can be strong enough and righteous enough to be the Cop for this project, making sure that the suppression lists are absolutely impenetrable (could Bill Gates even do this?) so that entire list doesn't end up in the wrong hands? Please don't let your hurry be our demise because of the potential problems this ruling could cause honest, hard-working people who together serve millions of customers/clients in their best interests, using legitimate e-mail to do it. Please reconsider the implementation of this ruling's suppression list as it now stands. Trusting you for fairness, Max Leach New Mexico USA