Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, Thank you for your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email. However, I am concerned about the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain suppression lists, and the overall direction of the above questions. There are so many problems and costs associated with the idea of suppression lists, and so much damage done to consumers and businesses alike, that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully. The number one reason people are on the net is to search for information. 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. From my understanding of the act, it will effectively put affiliate marketing out-of-business, and thus destroying many online businesses, especially the one person small business. 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. To me, this act does not curb spam, nor is it directed at spammers per se. Spammers are finding ways to get around it. It does infringe upon my right to send and receive email as I determine. There are many software programs out there to help me filter emails from those people from whom I do not want to receive emails. I was quite surprised at the potential problems this ruling on suppression lists could involve, and urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems, Respectfully, Ms. J Binegar Texas, USA