For a company that no one heard of until recently, Goodmail sure was able to stir up the Net Nannies with its announcement that AOL was going to start using its certified e-mail service and charge bulk mailers for guaranteed delivery of their blasts with the graphics and links intact.
Though there have been some understandable concerns raised about the deal, one thing bodes in its favor: some anti-spammers are upset about it.
“The Internet has become what it is because of freedom of communication. Open discussion is what gives it value. There should be no cost for particular services, and e-mail should be free and accessible to all. This will disenfranchise people,” said Richard Cox, chief technical officer of anti-spam group Spamhaus.org, according to CNET.
Cox said that charging for e-mail services was unlikely to reduce spam.
“It won’t reduce spam directly. AOL is already good at managing spam issues, and Yahoo is getting better,” Cox said. “It may make it easier to filter mail, and may provide more resources for spam prevention, but it could also mean that people lose e-mails and so change provider,” he added.
Yes, people may lose e-mails and change providers. And though no one knows if AOL’s scheme will work, it has market protections built in. AOL’s e-mail box users are suddenly worth more money. If AOL starts blocking e-mail people want, they leave. If marketers don’t see a return on their investment, they stop paying.
Pretty simple.
Also, that a representative of an anti-spam blacklisting group would get in an uproar over AOL using Goodmail is ironic. Blacklisting proponents have argued for years that networks are private property and the people who own them can do whatever they want.
Seems to me, that argument extends to Goodmail and AOL, as well.
