Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I applaud your efforts to solve the problem of unsolicited bulk email, but I'm concerned about the requirement for business people to maintain suppression lists. There are many problems and costs associated with this idea, and so much damage done to consumers and businesses as well, that I feel you should be careful in your recommendations in this regard. Requiring the use of suppression lists will seriously damage many legitimate online publications. My main 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 most probably have that consequence. 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 to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems, Best regards, Stephan Bourget Quebec, Canada PS In E.2.4, it should be the person who keeps the email address. If it's just a forwarded message with no email address being kept for repetitive mailings, no opt-out should be necessary for there would be no list anyway. Also, the friend forwarding a message to another friend should rather be considered sending a personal email than a commercial one.