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 aboutthe proposed requirement for merchants to maintainsuppression lists.There are so many problems and costs associated withthis idea, and so much damage done to consumers andbusinesses alike, that I feel I must urge you toconsider this matter most carefully.Requirement of the use of suppression lists willseriously damage many of the legitimate publicationsavailable on the net. My specific concern is for harm topublishers who require permission from the consumerprior to adding them to any list.They're not who CAN-SPAM was designed to put out ofbusiness, but this requirement will very likely havethat effect.There's also the potential for significant harm toconsumers, because of the problem of properly knowingtheir intent when they unsubscribe from a list. On topof that, these suppression lists could easily fall intothe hands of spammers, leading to more spam instead ofless.I want you to know that I LOOK for advertising on the sites and in the newsletters of websites I go to. When I land on a site I like I WANT to know who they are affiliated with. Its one of the best ways to receive a personal recommendation on the internet. I want them to send me to another site that may or may not be something I am interested in, - just as today I asked a pharmacist for a recommendation, another time, a book store owner gave me recommendations, a bike shop the same, and so on. I want to make MY OWN choices. Consumers rely on these recommendations, whether face to face or on the net. So, please, don't over react to the spamming situation and penalise people and businesses that are conducting legitimate businesses. I was quite surprised at the potential problems thisruling could involve, and urge you in the strongestpossible terms to reconsider its implementation in lightof these problems,Respectfully,Sylvia FrainAlberta, Canada