Spam-free "safe class" of e-mail would come with a cost

This is the season for new spam-fighting and security systems to emerge, perhaps the result of mass New Year's resolutions by techno-merchants that have decided to apply some original angles. The latest: America Online and Yahoo! just established a way for certain "legitimate" businesses to pay them a penny for messages that bypass the spam filters that may cause the message to stray or be lost or stolen.

According to GoodMail, which developed the system, the service identifies e-mail from accredited senders and assures delivery to the inboxes of AOL and Yahoo! customers, where the e-mails will be labeled with a symbol indicating their safety. The idea is to create a "safe class" of e-mail that users feel comfortable in opening. No spam, no viruses. No problem.

I support everything that prevents spam. I've also seen "The Godfather" a few times, and developed a thick, cynical skin. So I can imagine this as a back-alley conversation: "You want your mail to get through? Then you will have to pay us a penny a message. If you don't pay up, your mail will sleep with the fishes."

I don't mean to cloud GoodMail's good name or even suggest that the reputable Yahoo! or AOL would ever attempt such tactics. Even so, the shakedown is implicit. Your competition is paying the premium to get their messages through; if you don't, you are at a disadvantage. And if everyone signs up, then GoodMail gets its wish for that elusive better class.

These stopgap methods ignore the truth, that e-mail resembles a wonderful old colonial mansion with a rotting foundation. You can replace one brick at a time, and the floors shake a little less. But you can't really fix the problem without tearing down the house and starting over.

This problem is that e-mail is free. It's been more than 10 years since Internet e-mail emerged big time, and the idea that we can communicate with anyone in the world for the price of going online has embedded permanent stars in our eyes. You can write the president or your kindergarten teacher, and it doesn't affect your bottom line.

The dark side of this utopia is now clear. You can write a thousand letters for little or no cost, but a thousand people can also write you. Can we turn time back? Can we, in 1994, ask the Post Office to step in and create a system where we pay for individual messages?

If salespeople and Nigerian scam artists need to pay 40 cents for each of their little missives, then we will receive pitches only from people who have made some kind of investment. And if we have to pay for each message sent, then we aren't going to waste our time or our money. Imagine how quiet and tranquil a world like that would be.

Of course, this will never happen. The e-mail house can't be demolished. Too many of us live here already. And we cannot tear it down just because it is too big or too free.

Maybe one day we'll awake in a blissful, fluffy spam-free world. Or maybe not. On one level, new spam-fighting solutions are wonderful, imaginative and deserve our support. At the same time we need to realize they are incremental, and will not change our lives.

If you have questions or suggestions for Charles Bermant, you can contact him by e-mail at cbermant@seattletimes.com. Type Inbox in the subject field. More columns at www.seattletimes.com/columnists.