Comment Number: OL-105152
Received: 4/20/2004 12:11:13 AM
Organization: Knox Health
Commenter: Kerry Hostetter
State: TN
Agency: Federal Trade Commission
Rule: CAN-SPAM ANPR
Docket ID: [3084-AA96]
No Attachments

Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I too was troubled by the onslaught of spam; but I have found that simple spam eliminating programs, or using filters available in all the major programs eliminates 90% of my spam. Several of these programs to eliminate spam are free. I applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email. However, I am concerned about the proposed requirement for merchants to maintain suppression lists. There are so many problems and costs associated with this idea, and so much damage done to consumers and businesses alike, that I feel I must urge you to consider this matter most carefully. 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. Just like with people who make computer viruses, people can be very tricky. All anyone would need to do is become an "affiliate" for many programs and they would immediately get valid email addresses from the various suppression lists that they could use to spam with new products. I subscribe to several email newsletters. I do not read every one each time it comes out; but I am very thankful the have access to this information. I am also concerned that any email that also has an ad in it could be considered spam. Why can McDonalds get away with ALWAYS asking me "if I want fries with that", which there is no healthy reason to eat, yet someone I've purchased from before not be able to let me know of a companion product? I was quite surprised at the potential problems this ruling could involve, and urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems, The real spammers will ignore the law anyways, and the costs and burdens of the law will be carried by the legitimate business oerson. Respectfully, Kerry Hostetter Tennessee, USA