Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008To the Commissioners,Pinnacle Entertainment would like to support your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email. However, we are 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 reconsider one part of the requirement.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 compainies like mine that require permission from the consumer prior to adding them to any list. We are very careful in that we communicate only with our customers. Customers who have chosen to be a member of the clubs operated by our properties. Clearly, they're not who CAN-SPAM was designed to protect, but this requirement will very likely have that effect of reducing my company's legitimate right to communicate with them. Our second concern is that these suppression lists could easily fall into the hands of spammers, leading to more spam instead of less. This will have a significant effect on companies like mine that prides itself on it's compliance with the regulations - customers will be much less likely to allow us to communicate with them in this effective and timely fashion. 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,C S MyersLas Vegas, NV 89109