rangercal Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Internet giants to charge for email Simon Lambert, This is Money 6 February 2006 INTERNET giants AOL and Yahoo will bring a halt to free email for all by charging customers for speedier delivery. The internet service providers intend to introduce a system in America which will guarantee swifter delivery to senders who pay between ¼ cent and 1 cent (0.15p and ½p) per message. If the scheme works in America it is likely to be set up in Britain and the rest of the world. AOL and Yahoo say the new system is aimed at stopping spam and scam artists phishing for personal details with fake company emails. But consumer groups have expressed concerns the moves will be a step towards a two-tier internet, with wealthy companies or individuals receiving better service. The New York Times reported that AOL will launch its premium delivery service within the next two months, while Yahoo's plans are on still on the drawing board. Both internet firms would still accept email from senders who do not pay for better treatment, but unpaid messages will be slowed down by spam filters. The paid-for service would primarily be designed for companies, which send a large volume of emails and do not want them to end up in people's spam boxes. Banks, online retailers and other internet-based companies would see costs rise substantially, as many customers use web-based email such as Yahoo and AOL accounts for personal transactions. The service is intended to tackle spam by making it expensive to send messages. As well as clogging up the internet with spam, the free nature of email enables fraudsters to succeed in obtaining personal information by sending bogus messages. By sending out a huge volume of fraudulent emails con artists can obtain enough details to make money from a tiny response rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Glad I have Gmail then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFanForever @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 08:18 AM) Glad I have Gmail then. I'm guessing they'll do it too, if people take to it from Yahoo and AOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I don't understand, does that mean I'll have to pay for my Yahoo! accounts? Or are they giving businesses a chance to pay for an EZpass through the spam filter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 09:43 AM) I don't understand, does that mean I'll have to pay for my Yahoo! accounts? Or are they giving businesses a chance to pay for an EZpass through the spam filter? Seems to me that there will be a "basic" and a "premium" email service. Basic = loaded to the gills with ads Premium = gimme money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 07:43 AM) I don't understand, does that mean I'll have to pay for my Yahoo! accounts? Or are they giving businesses a chance to pay for an EZpass through the spam filter? The way I understood it when these sorts of plans were first proposed was that overall you really wouldn't wind up paying for anything. The ISP's will wind up handling it. What should happen is that each ISP in the business will start charging $.25 or so for each email it receives, if that email is sent by a reputable sender. Once you get a certain amount of people on an ISP, you'll wind up probably almost averaging out in terms of cost. Some small, local ISP will probably send roughly the same number of legit emails to AOL as AOL will send to that ISP, so the cost to each one should be a wash. However, if an ISP is hosting a spammer...the 15 million or so emails that spammer will send out will all of a sudden provide that ISP with a $3.75 million bill, at which point the ISP will either have to shut the guy down or pay up. The idea behind this is to make it so expensive for spammers to conduct business that they'll just disappear. It's good in theory. We'll see if it works in practice. I hope it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 It was only a matter of time until someone tried this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 There is also discussions to incorporate attachments into that as well. Once the mechanism is there for charging, it's just a matter of time . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 But consumer groups have expressed concerns the moves will be a step towards a two-tier internet, with wealthy companies or individuals receiving better service. uhhhh, it is already like that. Compare dial-up to a T1 line. not a big deal, like most things you get what you pay for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 7, 2006 -> 05:37 PM) uhhhh, it is already like that. Compare dial-up to a T1 line. not a big deal, like most things you get what you pay for. Damn good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev211 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 09:36 AM) I'm guessing they'll do it too, if people take to it from Yahoo and AOL. Isnt google 100% against charging people for things? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 I have yahoo right now but I wouldn't pay a dime for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 QUOTE(ScottPodRulez22 @ Feb 7, 2006 -> 08:18 PM) Isnt google 100% against charging people for things? today they are... give them a few years when growth slows and they need to find a new source of revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.