The Truth about Certified Mail and Yahoo! Mail
http://antispam.yahoo.com/faqs#a15

In reading these comments, I notice two significant misconceptions that should be corrected:
1.) This is not a "tax." A tax is a payment exacted from an individual by force (i.e. a government). AOL charging *businesses* for *commercial* email is in no manner, shape, way or form a "tax." There is nothing that *forces* people to pay to send email to AOL, they are choosing to pay to send email to them. Not to mention, as I will elaborate on in my second point, that even if someone wants to send email to AOL, they can still do that, with the same confidence as they have always had because:

2.) This doesn't affect everyone sending email to AOL, or mean that AOL will now block *all* email going to their domain that isn't paid for. This is patently false. All this does is guarantee the delivery of certain commercial emails that a company may certify. All the other email continues to go through the same gauntlet of spam filters, etc. that they always have. So this doesn't constitute a *reduction* or *constriction* of email being allowed in, it is simply a new process on top of that. Anyone who chooses not to use this service will have exactly the same confidence that their mail got through as they always have.

betanews: now with 75% more sensationalism!

features include:
"in Spat"
"shot back at interest groups"
"rebuffed"
probably some other stuff ...

AOL is lame along with anyone else that supports this insane idea.

Obviously, you didn't read what they were trying to do OR even TRY to understand what they are doing.

SPAM is a *HUGE* problem, and if you think that ANYTHING to stop SPAM on a global scale is insane, then I would have to rate your IQ at less than Jessica Simpson and Anna Nicole Smith, because even an blind paraplegic moron can see this is useful.

I happen to be a paraplegic and I resent the statement in this post from this narrow minded idiot!! Please remove it at once. It's obviously one of those uneducated AOL users who pollute the internet with useless garbage that makes no sense. Anyone who knows anything about paraplegia or paraplegics realizes what an idiotic statement it is. This stupd jerk needs to be involved in a near death car accident, or a motorcycle accident, or get shot with a gun so he can incur a spinal cord injury and spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair. Only then will he realize that being a wheel chair user has absolutely nothing to do with I.Q. Only then will he realize that it's also not the end of the world and life does go on. Only then will he realize that the world is full of idiots, JUST LIKE HE USED TO BE!!!
Thank you.

"AOL is lame along with anyone else that supports this insane idea."
-----------------------------------------------
An intelligent and cogent argument for "lame" would be nice. Do you have one?

AOL reminded its critics that Goodmail would only register those senders who could prove they had a pre-existing commercial relationship with their users.

everyone who is complaining about this obviously missed this......

...who could prove they had a pre-existing commercial relationship with their users.

That's the key, SPAMMERS will not be able to provide proof, therein lies they key to this entire idea.

This *almost* makes me want to use AOL as my primary email, because so far AOL is the *ONLY* ISP doing anything about SPAM.

Blockers, pop-up stoppers, anti-spyware are all bandaids, this needs to stop at the source.

Its like shooting a missile at an airplane, the plane has some chaff and flares to divert the missile, but proper ground infiltration could have disabled the missile launcher in the FIRST place, and the plane should not be its OWN last defense.

Destroy the silos before the missle launches, that's where ISP's need to concentrate, at the source. Get the SPAMMERS BEFORE they send.

An ISP knows EXACTLY who these people are, when they send out multiple emails, but so they don't lose precious money, they won't lift a finger to stop them, but that's where it needs to be stopped, before it even gets started.

You guys are missing the point. The point isn't so that a spammer can simply pay AOL to allow their emails, its so that legitimate companies can be assured their email is NOT marked as spam.

Spam is still spam.

Now, how this works, WE will identify AA as the legitimate company, and BB as the spammer.

AA sends an email to AOLUser1. AOLUser1 doesn't want AA email. So AOLUser1 blocks it to their inbox. AOLUser2 determines this is good email, and since AA is identified as legitimate, it doesn't get filtered. By default, AOL filters based upon content. If Email coming from AA LOOKS like SPAM it gets dropped to ALL AOLUsers, because its part of the global filter. Just because AOLUser1 doesn't want it, does not make it SPAM for every user.

Now BB has been identified by the industry AND AOL as a SPAMMER. ALL of BB email gets blocked at the server level, regardless of EMAILS accepted by individual AOLUsers or NOT.

AA is trying to send an email (i.e. Red Cross - Katrina). When they send out a global email, it is automatically FLAGGED as SPAM by a filter, because that's one of the triggers, MASS mailings. Whenver a message is sent to everyone@ domain, or a lot sent to multiple users, the filter basically blocks it, and from then on that sender is identified as SPAM.

Red Cross can simply pay AOL to be put on a special ALLOW list, so that whenver they send mass emails they are NOT filtered, except for invidiuals, who no longer want to see them in THEIR inbox.

Regular newsletters from some legitimate companies sometimes get filtered as well. So by paying AOL to be SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED (maybe they use some number or special ID on the filter) and it will be allowed to pass through, everytime.

Just because a SPAMMER pays AOL does NOT mean their emails will get through, they have been indentified as SPAM (domain name, orginating ISP, content, sender, etc..) they will ALWAYS get flagged.

This NEW certifcation allows companies, like the Red Cross, to ensure that Emails they send out, reach as many people as possible and don't get held up by default Filter rules.

Even if a SPAMMER gets a hold of Red Cross ID/Number, they still can't send on their behalf, because servers use reverse DNS to ensure its the actually domain. So only emails indentified AS legitimate, FROM a legitimate source are NOW going to be allowed to passthrough FILTERS.

We will still get the occassionaly mass email from United way, Red Cross, HP, depending on what sort of promotion they have going on. I will take that over hundreds of junk everyday.

This plan WILL work, IF AOL implements the proper identification and they ensure that ISP's check that their senders are who they say they are.

While I like this sort of a service, why is there a need for AOL to Profit off of this service though? Shouldn't it be free if a business can prove its legitimacy?

Why does MY organization have to pay for the "privilege," of doing business with someone, just because they choose to have AOL as an ISP.

Since when is it a businesses ISP that determines who a company or indivdual can do business with? Especially based on whether or not that company agrees to do business with the ISP.

Is this an infringement of free trade?

How is it right for AOL to dip into the profit margin of other companies by limiting communication and direct payment?

If all ISP's are going this route then lets take it on step further and have a global 3rd party handle it so that administrators can do better things with their lives than work to get put on every ISP's white list.

That is analogous to asking why the post office should profit from providing certified mail? Or why should the post office charge me for sending mail (ie. billing statements) from a business that can prove its legitimacy (ie. bank).

I have not been an AOL member for some time, but ultimately AOL is providing a service to ITS members, not to the public at large. It costs AOL to provide and manage email servers, so AOL has a vested in interest in reducing the amount of "junk" mail while giving legitimate senders a means to ensure delivery. Note that it is ensured delivery, not ensured views, as individuals can further limit the messages they want to see.

In no way is this plan an infringement on free trade. Free trade does not mean that you get to trade for free. AOL has a right to limit or grant access to their resources (mail servers) however they choose.

You speak of AOL dipping into a companies profit margins. Since when has it become right to expect to use someone else's property for free? As it stands now, it is the other companies who are dipping into the profit margin of AOL by requiring AOL to handle (at its own cost) all of the email (valid and spam) that a company might want to send.

I think the certified mail analogy is fairly accurate. While most snail mail gets to its intended destination (your mailbox), sometimes mail gets lost or put in the wrong mailbox. By paying extra for certified mail, you get the assurance that the mail was at least received by a recipient. The AOL plan is similar in nature, in that it assures that the mail is delivered to the recipients mail box.

I am not an AOL fan, but give them a break. They are a business trying provide services for their customers for profit.

thanks for the explanation.

This applies to ANY service provider, not just AOL. It does not matter if a business has AOL or not. EVERY vendor filters email, and if this proves successful, AOL may be pioneering a new way to control SPAM.

So AOL is profitting, but eventually, there will be a consortium of other businesses that will be an agency (i.e. internic for domain names) to control who is legitimate and who is not.

This is not an infringement, its the cost of doing business. Pay up, or risk having your emails filtered.. That's the deal.

The model the ISP / User / Sender business relationship is founded on is each business / user maintains the cost of their access through their ISP.

The USPS and Package Delivery systems are not an accurate comparison here. They are founded on very different principals. An end user receiving a priority package does not directly pay the carrier when the package is dropped off. That system would never work because of delivery absenteeism just for starters

Theses two systems are more accurately, direct opposites.

So then the next step in the slippery slope is that businesses have to start increasing their prices to only AOL users to cover the “priority,” service costs, and the AOL user ultimately pays for it anyway, but AOL shields the cost and can step back from their users’ business costs increasing because it’s an indirect increase.

If businesses started charging senders of every legitimate e-mail that came through to their servers, that business would fail quickly.

The ability to charge for incoming and outgoing email, would be passed on to the customer.

you may send four hundred emails a month, and at the rate of 1 penny, that would amount to 4 dollars.

A spammer sends out tens of thousands every week, at the rate of 1 penny, that would be several thousand dollars. Many spammers operate on very low budget (a couple of PC's) and low overhead (free email, group get's a percentage of profit).

If they risked lets say 6-10 thousand a month on emails they are sedning out, they better be DAMN sure they are sending to legitimate emails and customers, otherwise they would start and end each month with a deficit, and wouldn't make any money, and only the largest of spammers would be left.

Charging for email is the ONLY way to ensure spammers will stop.

Sure, you may pay 10 or even 20 dollars a month for email. Big whoop. Your ISP may even reimburse you each month (because its just paper amounts at that point, kinda like a bank reimbursing for ATM fees up to a limit).

a SPAMMER would no way get their money back, because its obvious they are using it for commercial purposes, and they would pay.. Not to mention, taxed on amounts they profit. but since we have no real way to track them, making them pay and everyone else pay for emails is about the only way everyone can be verified.

I can guarantee, your average spammer does NOT have a few thousand to throw away up front on the mere CHANCE they MAY make a few hundred spamming for some junk merchandise.

And businesses are not charging, your ISP is charging, so its not incoming email, its SENDING is where you get charged.

And certified mail is NOT opposite, its the same thing. You pay to ensure your mail arrives at its intended destination, not in some junk mail pile, like the other guy said.

Otherwise, if the post office saw mailers from some penny loafer newsletter, everyone usually throws those away, but if penny loafer PROVES they offer legitimate coupons, and useful savings for people, they post office would see to it they arrived as intended, otherwise, you are on your own.

A mail box is slightly different, in that you don't need the USPS to deliver mail, you could drive around and put mailers on people's mail box (other than breaking federal law, by placing objects inside the mailbox) this is legal.

AOL you can't simply circumvent their server, which makes this idea perfect. You go by their rules or not at all. Period.

Is my business also required to pay for the personal e-mail one of my users sends to his / her parents about a birthday coming up?

400 e-mails a month? Our very small mfg plant sends out a monthly e-newsletter that goes ONLY to our 500+ authorized resellers, Dealers, and end users; in one shot. And we're technically considered a "Small Business."

A spammer would very easily be able to recoup their investment if any ISP gave them the ability to pass through spam filters.

If they can pay a small amount per mail to substantially raise their rate of coverage, they will be able to charge more for the improved service.

Besides, it's a moot point as this is not what AOL is doing; they are not allowing spammers to get on the list. I want to reiterate that I am in favor of the service AOL is implementing. I'm just not for anyone other than the end user or ISP footing the bill for it if it's a single ISP that is implementing the service.

And like I suggested, this is a matter that is much larger than a single ISP, and it should be handled by a 3rd party global entity.

Charging for e-mail is not the only way to stop spam. A required, standardized, Global Bonded senders list / service would do the trick too.

Funded by ISP's, and possibly subsidized by the governments of the world.

You need to re-read the ENTIRE post, because you are asking questions and making assumptions on stuff, when its obvious you have not read a thing.

400 emails was only an example as an individual. A business would have a different plan, if you are legitimate.

This is only PROPOSED in the first place, there is not current "tax" or "levy" on emails anyway, so the point is moot, I was stating figures as an example.

A Spammer would NOT recoup expenses incurred, because their email is blocked and/or filtered. Aol is the first to implement such a feature, but if this works, like I said, it may catch on.

A spammer will NOT be able to pay, because they don't have current relationship with individuals, read the article. ITs PRIOR relationship, and they would have to PROVE it.

If they are a spammer, AOL would never let them sign up to pass through their filter.

And yes, it should be handled by a 3rd party entity, but AOL is taking the lead to protect THEIR users, that's why I think this is a good thing as well.

So, if charging for email is NOT the only way to stop spam (evidently you are smarter than the experts, because every community, IT department, and ISP in the country thinks its the BEST idea) you tell US, what would stop spam then? I would be interested in this, since you think you are smarter than everyone else in the industry.

And how would one PAY for this global/bonded senders list? Via a tax, which would come from... users, in the form of...? AN Email levy! Its the same as charging for email, hello!!?!??

Funded by ISP's how, assimilation? This isn't star trek, they can't get money by osmosis, someone has to pay.. and thereby its a charge, which yields payment for services rendered, which amounts to Email charging..

First:
Payment would be made by those wishing to Host a mail server. ISP's, corporations, individuals, etc. (Yes, this includes my company.)

You want a domain that is e-mail enabled? You pay a "global bonded sender’s enrollment fee." Payable when you register / renew your mail enabled domain. I'm fairly sure we could make it function on a couple dollars per domain per year...think of the $$$ generated. You of course have to adhear to the terms of being on the list and maintaining good standing.

That covers list maintance costs and the indivduals' responsibility / cost.

Next:
This GBS list functionality is then built right into every "GBS list" compliant SMTP mail server or "GBS list," compliant router which is backed up by major players who code and sell / distribute mail servers, and the internet routing / backbone mfg's and gods.

You could even do it through DNS, so that if you're not mail enabled, or you IP isn't on the GBS list you CANT get an MX or GBS record which would be required to pass SMTP traffic through the compliant routers at every ISP or on the backbone of the internet.

If your domain / IP address is not on the GBS list, your SMTP traffic doesn’t connect to the compliant servers or possibly even get past your ISP's routers.

It's just an extension of what's already out there in blacklists, but reversed / expanded / centralized.

That covers the Government subsidized / ISP businesses. And allows for the mfg's of the equipment / coding to recoop R&D costs in selling new equipment / services / builds.

Then:
Users that are on yahoo, MSN, (free web based e-mail,) or using their ISP's mail server to send mail from a 3rd party application are covered / monitored by their ISP, who can pass the cost through in subscription fees for service and advertisment fees.

So:
I'd much rather see it done from that standpoint than having every ISP have their own set of rules / enrollment / payments / white list / standards. It's an administration nightmare.

Remember the y2k nightmare that caused billions of dollars and millions of labor hours in updating code because of short sighted programers?

Is everyone ultimately paying for it…yes

Is this a big undertaking? Yes

Does it require that the major players in the internet universe are 100% on board? Yes.

Will it happen overnight. NO.

But no ONE entity is profiting from it for their OWN good. It would be for the good of all.

Simple concept, complicated execution.

But it's a One step, one process spam killing machine. No blacklists, no rDNS, no residential IP blocks, No open relay lists...the GBS List would cover all this as initial / continuing requierments, and do away with them when it becomes the standard.

It could even help with mass e-mailed virus's, malware and terrorist communications, because every e-mail on the public internet on port 25 would have to be bonded by an indivdual or corporation.

Again, I reiterate....I like the direction AOL is going, just not WHO / HOW THEIR CHARGING FOR IT. Pay us, or don't do business with our subscribers who rely on us to provide them with a service so they can do business with corporations like mine. (Our mass mailed ligitimate newsletter could very eaisly get us removed from thier current whitelist.) It's a very small scoped aproach.

Lets look at the charges. One domain is say $2-$5 a year for the GBS list. I have 6 mail enabled domains right now. That's $12-$30 a year. Our company had shelled out thousands of dollars for our SMTP anit-spam software and it's updates. (and it's worth every penny.)

So the math seems to work out in my and every other mailservers favor on that, because with this system, we all can get rid of our anti-spam software. This concept could actualy SAVE money!

AOL could, instead of profiteering from this, set a TRUE example and lead the way by getting together themselves, EarthLink, SBC, internic, Microsoft, Cisco, Quest, and anyone else that's a major player in the game and set it up for the benefit of everyone.

Maybe I'm not smarter then the "experts," out there. But "Gee Wizz, Wally" I just came up with this off the top of my head, and I'm just a nobody Admin for a small business, posting in the Betanews comments section of one article Betanews decided to publish....yet it seems pretty 'dang viable Buba.

Summery:
Maybe the experts need a good old fashion KISS rule and "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," refresher course? (my Star Trek, and Fletch Lives analogy's.)

I say...."Stop thinking so small, the internet and it's problems are Colossal and require Revolutionary solutions, but it doesn't mean they have to be complicated at their core."

the EFF has a peetition you can sign. Some of you may say that somehting online isnt much but the EFF is a strong orginization. so check them out at http://www.EFF.org the petition is at http://www.dearaol.com/invite/send. God luck to them and hope they win. I now dispise AOL. i never liked anything they did but this is goin to far. i realy hope they just think this is a good idea and not tring to make money from this.

Wouldn't this guarantee spam getting to my inbox?

Isn't e-mail included in AOL's online service? How can they guarantee e-mail delivery when paying extra? What is the difference between the two e-mail systems, if there are two systems?

What happens if my e-mail doesn't get delivered, do I get my cent back?

"Wouldn't this guarantee spam getting to my inbox?"

Only if you use AOL. ;P

I think you're probably smarter than that.

you are missing the true meaning, it is only for companys that are legit that you have told you would like them to send you things, not just some random large company that wants to give you an ad paying a cent to get its message to your inbox, dont let the article sway you, it is not a bid for large corps to get spam to you, it is just so that newsletters and stuff you have signed up for get to you. this is a service for you not a service for the corps

Below is the text from MoveOn.org's petition:

The petition's at:

http://civic.moveon.org/emailtax/

AOL recently announced what amounts to an "email tax." Under this pay-to-send system, large emailers willing to pay an "email tax" can bypass spam filters and get guaranteed access to people's inboxes--with their messages having a preferential high-priority designation.

Charities, small businesses, civic organizing groups, and even families with mailing lists will inevitably be left with inferior Internet service unless they are willing to pay the "email tax" to AOL.

The petition says: "AOL, don't auction off preferential access to people's inboxes to giant emailers, while leaving people's friends, families, and favorite causes wondering if their emails are being delivered at all. The Internet is a force for democracy and economic innovation only because it is open to all Internet users equally--we must not let it become an unlevel playing field."

AOL's proposed pay-to-send system is the first step down the slippery slope toward dividing the Internet into two classes of users--those who get preferential treatment and those who are left behind. We must preserve the Internet for everybody.

petitions are so dumb. when was the last time an online petition actually worked?

They are all idiots.

They don't like it? Drop AOL.

See how easy that was?

http://www.keepmanny.com/

but yes, petitions are dumb.

Online petitions work wonders. They are used every day by many political organizations such as MoveOn.org. They are signed by millions of people and then presented to congress or a member of the senate, even the President, to sway policy. They sent out the AOL "Email Tax" petition and presented it to AOL and OBVIOUSLY it worked because you got this guy in here ranting about how misrepresented the petition was. AOL is in a PANIC!! Get A Clue!! LOL

But they work!! Obviously!! And MoveOn.org is the best at it!!

But they issue they are complaining about is wrong.
Fact. The email that this AOL system will ensure bypasses the AOL Email filters is email from companies which AOL users have opted to receive. It is not "spam". Currently this email is allowed via the AOL whitelist and enhanced whitelist. Some people will sign any petition they are presented with, without verifying the accuracy of the issue being petitioned about.

I support what AOL is doing. They at least are taking so course of action to thwart spam.

Im a little confused as to who this actually affects, though...businesses mailing AOL users? AOL users who run a business, with their AOL mail being a contact? regular AOL users who want to send/receive mail to/from friends and associates?

Lets assume it affects AOL users who use their mail as their contact for their business. In this case I think its a worthy purchase. If you are running a business all you care about is sending mail to people about their purchases and product information and receiving mail from customers whether it is purchase orders, complains or RMA requests or whatever. You can ill afford to be bothered by spam in your mailbox.

If it affects corporations desiring to send mail to AOL users, I think its a worthy purchase. I think in this case AOL would already have a list of targeted companies which they have been able to determine as sending high volumes of e-mails to AOL users...spam companies or safe. Most casual spam companies will probably be unable to afford the costs. Obviously there will be some spam companies which can afford it, but by knocking off the ones who can't, they would probably eliminate more than half of spam.

If this affects casual AOL users sending and receiving mail to and from friends, then this might be a problem. I think that in this case they would have to introduce some kind of fair-use policy, which would be like XX number of mails per hour or something, instead of charging users, unless they want them leaving AOL. But I think a fair-use policy would work...

Actually, Tokar the likelihood that this would help reduce junkmail is highly suspect. In point of fact, it would more likely allow spammers to not only bypass protection controls we've worked so hard to build, but it would also create a loophole in any law used to thwart spam, no matter how toothless that law may be. People who make millions of dollars a year sending spam will not think twice about spending half a cent or a cent per message to get right into your inbox unchecked.

-- Darrell

I see your point: if AOL says they are safe because they bought into the system then junkmail filters might follow suit.

Yeah I see where you are going.

I know that there are A LOT of spammers who make their share of the pie on spamming, whether it be millions, or hundreds of thousands. And those people could afford the pricetag.
Im sure though, there are a lot of spammers who barely make a few thousand, barely enough that they can afford buying into the AOL system. And in that respect all those spammers will be essentially be "controlled"...though I think this will only effect AOL users from getting spam as opposed to all users in the world.

Oh well...

Giving it some thought, I think that e-mail systems should instate a fair-use policy.
The majority of users don't even e-mail more than 10 e-mails a day.
Maybe a limit of 10 e-mails per hour or something. I think people could handle this.

You need to understand how AOL currently blocks email which people losely call "Spam". AOL filters email based on its anti spam measures but these have a weakness. Too many people regard email which they have signed up to with legitimate corporations as Spam. With legitimate corporations you can always go to their websites and unsubscribe, no more email. But the internet and media is full of people stating "unwanted email is spam, do not unsubscribe to it, block it", so AOL members report these legitimate opted in email as Spam to AOL. When a certain threshold of email from an originator, (there are various rules see the AOL website for details) AOL block all further email from that originator. The result is genuine email wanted by its members is blocked. The current solution is to add such "trusted" senders" to a white list to ensure the email gets through. AOL now appear to want to charge for that process.

I thought the whole point of the system was that only "legal" spammers (opt-in) would be able to get through. Whereas "illegal" (the vast majority) would not be able to get through.

again you have no concept of whats really going on here. it is to ensure email which *you* have subscribed to that idiots keep reporting as spam gets through to your box. not so some random botnet spammer can email you. and besides if the spam filters dont stop them now are they going to stop them in the future?

Yes. that is correct. Too many people regard opt-in email as spam.

Goodbye to the 4 customers they had left.

It's optional. The majority of their millions of subscribers won't notice or care, except they might get a notice on the screen while composing an e-mail to let them know they can have it sent via Goodmail to guarantee it will make it through spam filters. Those who use it will do so because they want to.

If you're talking about AOL - it's 19+ million, moron. Good grief.

19 million? ha! that wouldn't even pay their light bill.. try more like 60 million. Yes, 60 million. They are they largest online community/ISP in the world. and they are HUGE!

"It's optional."
------------------------------------------
Exactly!

It is not an option for AOL subscribers when they send mail. It is for legitimate companies sending opted in emails to AOL customers

perhaps he was citing this mr. jump to conclusions: http://www.lightreading....cument.asp?doc_id=83507