Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, The public at large surely applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email. In fact, the amount of PORNOGRAPHY that slips through 'spam' blockers and variois 'filters' etc is simply shocking & most unwelcome. However, I am concerned about the proposed requirement for 'merchants' and / or web site owners to maintain suppression lists. There are so many problems and costs associated with this idea, and likely, so much permanent damage done to consumers and businesses alike, that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully. Requirement of the use of suppression lists will seriously damage many of the legitimate publications and related activities available on the net. One specific concern is for the harm to publishers who require permission from the consumer prior to adding them to any list. 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. To date, I've seen INCREASED 'spam traffic' from a myriad of sources. I don't see HOW this 'proposal' would affect the outcome in any way. SPAMMERS will never stop their malicious artform - but what about legitimate HOME BASED businesses who use the internet to promote their products, services and affiliations? 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, Ronald Langlois Ontario, Canada