Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008To the Commissioners,Although I appreciate your efforts to stop unsolicited email, I don't believe "suppression lists" accurately address or solve the problem. Much of the opt-in information (i.e. information requested by email users) is delivered in the "ezine" format. The equivalent of the "ezine" in the offline world is the magazine or newsletter. I subscribe to a magazine that has a lot of articles and ads about home decorating, cooking, and gardening. These are all hobbies of mine. The same magazine also always contains articles and ads about parenthood and child rearing. I don't have any children. I don't read those articles. If the same restrictions were enforced in the offline world, this magazine publisher would need to delete articles and offers about children from my issues and delete articles about gardening for subscribers who don't read those article, etc. This is obviously as impractical for online publishers as it would be for offline ones. In an attempt to solve one problem, laws should not be created in such a way as to create new problems for those legitimate businesspersons who are trying to serve the consumers who have requested their services and information.I have yet to receive spam from ezines publishers and stores for which I have legitimately requested information. In fact, the content of the majority of unsolicited emails I receive is not even in a category that fits any of my interests.Why is the government so concerned with unsolicited emails while it is not concerned with the unsolicited junk mail I also receive every day? It wouldn't be because the U.S. Post Office gets money for delivering that junk email to me would it? As much as I dislike spam, I'm pretty sure no trees are cut down unnecessarily to create it.Respectfully,Janet TaylorHuntington Beach, CA, U.S.A.