Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email, also known as SPAM. Everybody I know hates it. However, I am concerned about the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain suppression lists. There are honest people on the Internet trying to make an honest living or extra income through the Web that this proposed legislation will hurt. At a time when the government takes more than one-third of a person's income (40% is not unheard of) and unemployment is still high, I can't believe this can be seriously considered. It is I believe a well-intentioned attempt to stop pornographic SPAM but it could hurt honest businesspeople in the process. 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. 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. 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, Glenn Reschke California, USA