Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I am supportive and agree that there needs to be laws in place to protect everyone from the inundation of bulk email. However, the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain a suppression list concerns me from both a consumer and a merchant viewpoint. I subscribe to and receive many online publications that I read and whose information I use and rely upon. I'm afraid that requiring these publishers and other online merchants who provide valuable content and services as well as discounts for products and services will be forced out of business. Only the big companies who can afford the technology as well as a legal dept. to defend themselves will be able to stay in business. This will likely lead to greater cost to consumers due to lack of competition. I can also see a scenario in which spammers may receive the suppression list in accordance with the law and then proceed to spam that list and create legality problems for the person who was complying by sending the suppression list. Indeed the proposed law would likely create more problems than it would solve. To summarize, a solution to the spam problem needs to be implemented. However, it should not be so far in the extreme as to punish the very people the regulation is trying to protect. In addition it would have far reaching and serious results to the legitimate small and medium size businesses. These are not the ones the CAN-SPAM laws were designed to put out of business, yet it will likely have that effect. I strongly urge you to reconsider implementation of this regulation. Respectfully, Greg Root Texas, USA