also @ TechSpot: Weekend Open Forum: Most memorable videogame boss fights

AOL to start charging companies for spamming

By

On February 6, 2006, 2:00 PM EST

No matter what it is someone is doing, there's another someone looking for a way to get them to pay for it. This time, though, it might be good. America Online, in a move similar to one Yahoo began implementing earlier this week, announced plans to begin charging for SPAM. That is, make the company advertising pay for it, on the range of $2-3 for every 1,000 e-mails. This isn't all good news – the money isn't for SPAM stopping research, merely another source of income for AOL, and doesn't take into account that the majority of SPAM comes from people doing it illegally anyways. In the future, perhaps, this will become more effective, and more people will be assured that advertisement reaching their inbox is at least safe, if not wanted.

"This will be painful for marketers in the beginning, but it is a positive step in forcing them to be more selective in who they e-mail," says Jupiter Research's David Daniels. "Many now just blast e-mail rather than target an audience."
This move comes in partnership with Goodmail, a company working to provide “certified” mail environments where an entire company has a record that indicates whether or not the e-mail will be delivered. As it stands, most e-mail today is still “just delivered”, regardless of course or content, and this is one step to changing that. It's unlikely this will have much of an impact at first, but there is a problem with SPAM and something has to be done, criticism aside.

Related Stories

No tags on this story

User Comments (9)

Post a comment
DragonMaster
on February 6, 2006
2:31 PM
It means that they know WHO is spamming if they can charge them a fee and they don't stop them?

Reply

Nic
on February 6, 2006
2:50 PM
Why don't they just block all emails when more than, say 1000 in a day, having the same source address are detected? Sending more than this should require a certificate to authorise the transmission, and it should then be charged at a penny per email. This would make spamming too expensive.

Reply

JMMD
on February 6, 2006
3:30 PM
If it cuts down on SPAM then I'm all for it. On the other hand, it may just mean we'll get more spam and AOL will be taking a piece of the pie. I still don't understand how spam companies are making money. Who the heck clicks on these ads. I don't even open them.

Reply

nathanskywalker
on February 6, 2006
4:13 PM
AOL, nice idea, selfish motives, and that is going to take more work than you are going to be able to handle. I sincerely doubt AOL has what it takes to make this a worthwhile endeavor, so i think i'll just sit back and laugh at them.

Reply

AeonXX
on February 6, 2006
4:59 PM
This just means there will be more “legitimate spam,” and AOL will now get paid for letting spammers flood your inbox. Of course, it all goes straight to my junk folder anyway, so it doesn’t bother me at all. That, and I haven’t used AOL since 1994; I’ve never looked back.

Reply

DragonMaster
on February 6, 2006
5:59 PM
[quote]Who the heck clicks on these ads. I don't even open them.[/quote]-Click! Lots of bright people who are the same that don't know that loud volumes can damage hearing, that a coffee is hot, that you shouldn't put your hair dryer in the water and that don't know what a flashing red light is.

Reply

need_a_dell
on February 6, 2006
9:28 PM
This sounds like a decent move on AOL's behalf. Sure, it's just pure profit for them, but it may in fact deter spammers from spamming. Not only is this a profit for AOL, but for it's users as well. The less crap coming into our inboxes, the better.

Reply

otmakus
on February 6, 2006
9:50 PM
This means more market for those bot network peddlers, more and more spam companies will resort to them than to AOL or Yahoo. This means more attempts to include our computers into one of the zombies.The more effective way is to split the profit Yahoo and AOL get with their users, so we can actually earn something with every spams we receive.

Reply

barfarf
on February 7, 2006
4:25 PM
I agree with AeonXX is this really stopping spam? Or will it actually make spammer right since they are paying for it. This legitimizes and endorse spammers. They NOT getting fined for breaking rules. They are being a good customer and paying for a service. I say in the USA we should allow caning as a punishment.

Reply

Browse more commented news

Post a new comment

Guest user

To post as an anonymous
user click here
.

Members

If you are a TechSpot member,
please login first.


By signing up you gain complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of computer and technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Post messages, get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.

Subscribe to TechSpot

Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and tech breaking news.