Bulk E-Mail Fee Draws Fire

Iria · Feb 28, 2006, 08:59 PM

A variety of interest groups have joined forces to fight a proposed bulk e-mailing fee they claim strikes at the heart of online communication — a level playing field for rich and poor.

America Online plans to introduce a service that would charge businesses and other bulk e-mailers a fee to route their e-mail directly to a user's mailbox without first passing through junk mail filters.

Another major provider, Yahoo, plans to test an optional certified e-mail program based on "transactional" messages only, such as bank statements and purchase receipts, Yahoo spokeswoman Karen Mahon said.

"Yahoo is not planning to require payments for businesses or organizations to send e-mail to Yahoo users. Companies can continue to send e-mail to Yahoo e-mail users at no cost in exactly the same way they always have."

Citing AOL's plan, Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Civic Action, said, "The creativity and ingenuity that have driven the internet have always relied on an open platform where the haves and have-nots get treated equally. This e-mail tax system is a big step toward dismantling that system."

The alliance protesting the move includes liberal activist group MoveOn, the conservative activist group RightMarch.com, the U.S. Humane Society, labor and environmental groups and online medical communities.
_____________
Read More / Source: Wired News

Matth · Mar 1, 2006, 05:00 PM

The BEST spam filtering, out of a not exactly stellar state of the art, seems to be at wanadoo.

Their filter is normally effective, but normally over-aggressive (it's trapped my Serif order confirmation before) - but if you webmail check first, you can soon add your regular "false positives" to your permitted sender list - mine is now as effective as any desktop system I could contrive.

YOU should be in charge of your opt-in's and opt-out's to spam filtering, unless they intend offering a free, ad-funded service - I'd use it, but it would be WAR with my own filtering.

Feb 28, 2006, 08:59 PM	#1
Iria DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 7,275 Rep Power: 87	Bulk E-Mail Fee Draws Fire A variety of interest groups have joined forces to fight a proposed bulk e-mailing fee they claim strikes at the heart of online communication — a level playing field for rich and poor. America Online plans to introduce a service that would charge businesses and other bulk e-mailers a fee to route their e-mail directly to a user's mailbox without first passing through junk mail filters. Another major provider, Yahoo, plans to test an optional certified e-mail program based on "transactional" messages only, such as bank statements and purchase receipts, Yahoo spokeswoman Karen Mahon said. "Yahoo is not planning to require payments for businesses or organizations to send e-mail to Yahoo users. Companies can continue to send e-mail to Yahoo e-mail users at no cost in exactly the same way they always have." Citing AOL's plan, Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Civic Action, said, "The creativity and ingenuity that have driven the internet have always relied on an open platform where the haves and have-nots get treated equally. This e-mail tax system is a big step toward dismantling that system." The alliance protesting the move includes liberal activist group MoveOn, the conservative activist group RightMarch.com, the U.S. Humane Society, labor and environmental groups and online medical communities. _____________ Read More / Source: Wired News

Mar 1, 2006, 05:00 PM	#2
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,410 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	The BEST spam filtering, out of a not exactly stellar state of the art, seems to be at wanadoo. Their filter is normally effective, but normally over-aggressive (it's trapped my Serif order confirmation before) - but if you webmail check first, you can soon add your regular "false positives" to your permitted sender list - mine is now as effective as any desktop system I could contrive. YOU should be in charge of your opt-in's and opt-out's to spam filtering, unless they intend offering a free, ad-funded service - I'd use it, but it would be WAR with my own filtering.