|Received:||4/16/2004 8:32:11 PM|
|Agency:||Federal Trade Commission|
Subject: CAN-SPAM Act Rulemaking Project No. R411008 Dear Commissioners, I agree with you wholeheartedly that something should be done about the problem of unsolicited bulk email or Spam as we label it. However, the CAN-SPAM Act requirements being considered that would mandate that merchants maintain suppression lists is deeply concerning. I believe that the proposed cure will be more costly and damaging than the problem itself and will effect both the Internet subscribers and merchants alike. Therefore, I suggest that you analyze the potential problems that this course of action could produce and re-consider this matter very carefully. I believe a better problem analysis and decision development study be done before this Act is enforced. Valuable and legitimate web based publications will suffer. Publishers who require permission from the consumer (Opt-in) before adding them to any list should be exempt from the rigorous requirements as they are proposed. After all, I don't believe that you targeted these valuable information sources to cease and desist since they are not CAN-SPAM types. However, the result is that the plan doesn't differentiate the good from the bad. The result is that they will be very seriously hurt and may even be forced out of business while the real spammers will continue devising ways to get around the system with new and more sophisticated spoofing techniques. Consumers stand a chance to be harmed even more since the suppression lists will probably eventually be found in the possession of spammers, leading to more spam instead of eliminating it. Another point is that merchants have no way of properly knowing a consumers intent when they unsubscribe from a list. With all this said, I must admit that it shocks me to think that thes porblems have not been taken into account before the proposed rules were developed. I hope that you take this as an attempt at constructive criticism and not just some blabber from a disgruntled party. Please, I urge you, most sincerely, to re-evaluate and re-consider implementation of this plan based on the above. Respectfully, Joe Sigismonti Carlsbad, CA 92009 USA Additional Comments from Question D 1.They can also comandere a user's machine without their knowledge and use it as a launch pad for spamming other users on the Internet. 2. They can spoof email addresses as senders and choose random addresses they amass to hide thier own identity. Additional Comments from Question E2 4. The recipient of the Opt-out request should remove the appropriare email addres from THEIR list. They are the one that sent the message and should honor the request of their targeted recipient.