Comments:

Re: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking, Project No. R411008 To the Commissioners, There are many technologies in place that will allow individuals to monitor, block, and/or accept Internet pages and emails using a number of different devices to filter content. Much like other sources such as television, radio, newspapers, newsletters, and magazine publications, online sources rely on advertising to enhance and increase their business endeavors. Because consumers are not willing (read "too lazy") to block other forms of advertising (TV, radio, etc.) doesn't make them any less likely at some point to ultimately buy something through these sources. Why should Internet advertising be singled out, in violation of First Amendment rights? Internet users and email recipients have the technological power to "trash" unwanted emails, block "Pop-ups," as well as using "opt-out" lists provided by commercial Internet advertisiers. Is this not enough? Must commercial Internet advertisers be subjected to increasingly invasive governmental actions in direct violation of Constitutional rights? While I do applaud your efforts to curb the problem of unsolicited bulk email, I am very 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 has and will be 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 Internet. My specific concern is for the potential 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. Where is the "lassez faire" for Internet businesses with such an action? 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 I URGE YOU IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE TERMS TO RECONSIDER ITS IMPLEMENTATION in light of these problems, Respectfully, Frank W Clark Florida, USA