Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, I applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited 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 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, I am an opt in subscriber of over 30 lists and enjoy reading the material in the emails sent to me. It is my choice to buy or not. The lists I subscribe to are informative and of use to me. My biggest hassle is unsolicited email. What ever can be done to track down people who generate spam, I welcome. However opt in newsletters etc are a way of doing relationship marketing and serious business people do not abuse their clients trust. For the many genuine business relationship marketers who use email to build relationships please do not make it onerous as our world is a big place and email crosses all boundaries and makes global business easy to do and great connections are made. Respectfully, Bronwyn Buck Queensland AUSTRALIA