Comments:

04-14-2004 Steven Ingram *REDACTED PERSONAL INFORMATION* Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, SPAM is an issue that affects us all; therefore 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. As of this date, as you know, there are no or few states withholding sales taxes. However due to the overwhelming problems and costs associated with this idea, I feel that the viability of trade on the internet and thus future state sales tax revenue will be adversely affected by the proposal. States, experiencing a drop in sales taxes, will inevitably turn to federal sources of income to make up the future shortfall. There will be so much damage done to consumers and businesses alike, that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully. As you probably have seen, there are many legitimate sources of information on the web. 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. There are many valid informational newsletters, publications, offers, and etc. that customers “opt-in” to receive. 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, Steven Ingram Austin, Texas