Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008To the Commissioners,I applaud your efforts to curb the problem ofunsolicited 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 willseriously 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.There's also the potential for significant harm toconsumers, 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 thisruling could involve, and urge you in the strongestpossible terms to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems,Respectfully,MIke JayPS: If you pass this regulation you do not stop spam in my view, you only made it much harder to do business for those of us that run respectable internet business and the spammers continue to do what they do--spam! In hypercompetition, driving up our costs does nothing for our ability to serve customers more effectively around the world and since we have to compete with other governments who do NOT enforce this rule, we will be at a severe disadvantage and in the end, the customer still suffers.