Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, While I am in favor of your efforts to bring a halt to unsolicited bulk email, I am very concerned about requiring merchants to maintain suppression lists. First, the costs and problems this idea will create will damage both consumers and businesses. Second it will not truly eliminate the most offensive unsolicited email campaigns any more than the original CAN-SPAM legislation. In fact, I have more exposure now since CAN-SPAM to unsolicited pornographic emails, faked sender emails, and these were two things CAN-SPAM was supposed to eliminate. If we have to create suppression lists, it only creates one more vehicle for those you are trying to get rid of. The very existence of these lists will encourage spammers to break into mail servers to get copies and use them to increase their own mailings. Legitimate online businesses will bear the blame for this probably as well. Is spam a problem? Yes, and we should look at ways to limit it, but the implementation of suppression lists is not going to solve the problem. It will only cause more problems for both legitimate business and consumers. It will force many legitimate businesses out of business limiting consumer choices as well. I suspect the only real winners will be those who you are specifically trying to get out of email – the spammers. I can only urge in the strongest possible terms to reconsider implementation of this in light of these problems, and work harder to find a real solution that benefits all users. Repectfully, Jim Port Wisconsin, United States