> AOLs stock direction has the potential of a backlash by its users and
> public where as goodmail as it seems has only an upside...

This may be true in the short term, but in the long term I am not so sure.
According to a recent article in the NY Times, "Goodmail was founded several
years ago with the idea that it would charge postage for all mail, but it
has narrowed its focus to mail sent by companies and major nonprofit
organizations"... You don't need a PhD in communication to understand that
there is going to be a major backlash from the community, and that you need
to be very careful in how you introduce this idea.

The thing is, you and I could design the technical platform for a
Goodmail-like venture over a beer tonight. There really isn't much to it.
The implementation could be very similar to DomainKeys, and would fit on a
napkin or two. In fact, it probably SHOULD be an extension of the current
DKIM draft. I could write the software in a week. Funding needs are minimal,
we could split the costs, and I have the press and industry contracts to get
the ball rolling. When the bars closed, we would agree to meet again
tomorrow morning and start working on the patent application to lock
everyone else out of the market, after which we would take a look at
corporate jet catalogues. For me, the Airbus Corporate Jetliner, please. It
can be converted to a regular airliner if I later decide to start my own
airline.

This is the stuff that Silicon Valley success stories are made of. But in
this particular case, as we woke up and smelled the coffee the next morning,
we would realize that there was just this one little problem: convince the
world that, from now on, you will have to pay for certification by the
message, to the tune of 5 figures per day for a modest hosting provider like
L-Soft. Not because the certification itself costs that kind of money, but
because the Airbus Corporate Jetliner does, and I am going to want one for
every month of the year, each decorated with a different theme.

The trump card, of course, is the huge revenue source. We can offer a share
to the ISPs and this will give them a strong incentive to support our plan.
Instead of paying a fortune to combat spam, they can make a fortune getting
rid of spam! Who would say no to that?

Pulling now my tongue out of my cheek, I would not want any part in an
initiative to tax every e-mail message sent on the net. But if my family had
been kidnapped and this was the ransom, I would phase in this e-mail fee
very slowly, one little step at a time. I would start with a premium service
for a handful of early adopters. Slowly, without making any ripples, I would
increase the number of companies signed up to the service, and ask the ISPs
to tighten their spam filters, ever so slowly, so that the incentive to fund
my private jets would slowly increase over time, until finally there were
enough people signed up to the plan that the ISPs could get away with
pulling the plug on the old whitelists, all in the name of finally nailing
the spammers. The last thing I would try is a revolution - pay by June 30 or
we'll put all your mail in junk folders in the company of financial scams,
porn sites and the like. It just wouldn't be smart to create so much uproar
out of thin air when you can avoid it with an ounce of patience.

So while it is true that, in the short term, Goodmail stands to make a lot
of money from AOL's surprise decision, the uproar that is likely to follow
from the June phase-out will probably result in the development of much
cheaper alternatives, perhaps even community-funded (free) alternatives. AOL
may not support these at first, but eventually there will be enough market
pressure for them to do so, or marginalize themselves to the point where it
will no longer matter what they decide. And, of course, once companies have
a choice between paying five figures a day and three figures a year for
certification, they will choose the latter. Goodmail-style certification
will become a niche product for the very few that can afford to pay
thousands of dollars for a premium "trusted" icon in their customers'
mailbox. Even then, prices will have to drop from the current, over-the-top
"1/4 cent to 1 cent per message" (NY Times article). I realize that these
price levels are not exactly transparent if you do not work in the e-mail
industry, so just picture a certification fee of $2.50 to $10 per gallon of
gasoline, or "a few cents per mile."

In a way, this recent announcement is good for the community. If they had
used a stealthy approach and a more reasonable fee level, we might never
have smelled the smoke until it was too late to react. As things stand, I
think AOL has a choice between backing off, and forcing the community to get
organized and develop low-cost or perhaps even free certification
alternatives.

  Eric