Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, Just like everyone else on the Internet these days, I suffer the load of unsolicited "spam" messages every day. Many are offensive and obscene. No one would like to see this stopped more than I. However, your regulations need to consider a few key points: 1. Implementing a national do-not-spam list is not a good idea. I am quite concerned over the potential problems this ruling could involve, and urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider its implementation. Many legitimate Internet marketers (myself included) would find complying with this kind of requirement technically dauting and too expensive to implement. It will force most out of business. My specific concern is for harm to publishers who require permission from the consumer prior to adding them to any list. Why should this practice suffer because of the abuses of the address farmers? One idea that might lessen the devastating side effects such a move might have is to have the supression list regulations only apply to marketers who email in very large volumes. Small operators (and most legitimate operators, for that matter) do not send out millions and millions of messages each day like the ultra-spammers; they only send out a few thousand per day perhaps. 2. I am more comfortable than most Internet marketers with the idea that a seller needs to take some responsibility for the action of its affiliates. For example, the vendors of the penis enlargement supplements are well aware that they have affiliates who are spamming the world trying to sell their products. They have the nerve to post "report spam" links on their web sites, but that doesn't stop them from paying out the commission checks for the guys who do it. That's where the government needs to focus its attention: on the spammers pocketbook. If you cut off the incentive to spam, you kill the spam. Each spam message has a link somewhere that the spammer's affiliate code; that how they get credit for a commission if you buy something. If the government could impound these commissions, you'd shut down the spammers. The spammers might be hard to find, but the vendors they represent usually aren't. 3. The vast majority of spam messages are sent by a very small number of people. They do things that are simply outrageous, that no legitimate marketer would consider. That being so, I do not think it is necessary to enact very stringent regulations. Forbid only the most flagrant practices, and this troublesome group will still be in violation. You don't need a fine net to catch these guys. Respectfully, Randal Breaux Montgomery County, TX