Replies

I don't think the point is to charge a penny for spammers to get into your in-box, but rather that most spammers wouldn't spend the penny, therefore the spam would dry up. The spammer now faces the following cost-benefit decision: if I send one or 1 million solicitations for, say, cheap Viagra, the cost is the same: nothing. If I send 1 million, I might get a couple orders, so I'll be ahead. However, if it would cost me $10 thousand to send the million messages, I'd need quite a lot of sales to break even. Therefore, most spam would go away. If 1¢ proved not to be enough of a deterrent, then 2¢ might be.

Doesn't anyone get this? AOL and Yahoo are threatening free speech, a free Internet, and innovation in general. Small Internet companies, email newsletter publishers, and email discussion lists may be taxed out of existence. The result will be less innovation and less conversation. The Internet will cease to be a harbor of free speech. Instead, speech will be limited to those who can afford to pay ransom in the form of a private tax.

The Internet was funded by taxpayers through the Department of Defense. If it is owned by anyone, it is owned by the people. AOL and Yahoo did not create the Internet, do not own the Internet, but are effectively attempting to impose punitive taxation of the private email conversations of citizens and companies.

The AOL tax will be couched in paternalistic terms as a means of protecting users from spam, viruses, and phishing. Do not be fooled. It is a money grab, pure and simple. The former can all be accomplished for free (or almost free) with a simple whitelisting approach.

The only beneficiaries of AOL and Yahoo’s action are AOL and Yahoo executives who will pocket larger bonuses. AOL and Yahoo shareholders will only benefit superficially and short term, until the tax begins to impede innovation and reduce the dynamics of the Internet. Then, we all suffer.