Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email, but I would like you to consider my comments. As a respectable web site owner and Internet marketer I wish to inform the Commission of both mine and my Internet collegues endeavours into halting the intrusion into peoples lives with the nuisance of Spam-Mail. However the Commission needs to be aware of the fact that we (respectable Internet marketers) make every effort we possibly can to ensure that our presence is solely at the descretion of the potential customer. We have built up a trust in our market place and continue to do so, for we know that the importance of an honest relationship with our customers will eventually see the end of the unscrupulous 'gurus' and the damage that they cause. 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. There's also the potential for significant harm to consumers, 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 this ruling could involve, and urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider its implementation in light of these problems, Respectfully, Chris Baron Hull - East Yorkshire - England - United Kingdom