<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: AOL and Yahoo Get Paid for E-Mail</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/05/aol-and-yahoo-get-paid-for-e-mail/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/05/aol-and-yahoo-get-paid-for-e-mail/</link>
	<description>any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:33:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Federman</title>
		<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/05/aol-and-yahoo-get-paid-for-e-mail/comment-page-1/#comment-1052</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Federman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2006 15:23:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/05/aol-and-yahoo-get-paid-for-e-mail/#comment-1052</guid>
		<description>This is no different in effect than the telcos making noises about charging big content providers for preferential service delivery. The narrative goes like this: A large company is able to make money by accessing what is &quot;rightfully ours&quot; (&quot;our&quot; pipes, &quot;our&quot; customers) and therefore, we need to find a way to get some of that money. 

This, frankly, is obsolescent thinking that will end up damaging those companies in the same way that the RIAA has been irreparably damaged (and doesn&#039;t quite realize it yet). 

BTW, &quot;gantlet&quot; is actually the correct spelling of the ancient torture device that people had to run through. &quot;GaUntlet&quot; is a bastardized spelling that has gained acceptance as an alternate by those who only knew the synonym for glove. Let&#039;s face it - not too daunting to run by a bunch of people waving gloves at you, is it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is no different in effect than the telcos making noises about charging big content providers for preferential service delivery. The narrative goes like this: A large company is able to make money by accessing what is &#8220;rightfully ours&#8221; (&#8220;our&#8221; pipes, &#8220;our&#8221; customers) and therefore, we need to find a way to get some of that money. </p>
<p>This, frankly, is obsolescent thinking that will end up damaging those companies in the same way that the RIAA has been irreparably damaged (and doesn&#8217;t quite realize it yet). </p>
<p>BTW, &#8220;gantlet&#8221; is actually the correct spelling of the ancient torture device that people had to run through. &#8220;GaUntlet&#8221; is a bastardized spelling that has gained acceptance as an alternate by those who only knew the synonym for glove. Let&#8217;s face it &#8211; not too daunting to run by a bunch of people waving gloves at you, is it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
