FC: Replies to AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Previous message:
http://www.politechbot.com/p-03146.html

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:41:58 -0500
To: declan () well com
From: Gregory Wright <gwright () ravyn com>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

Good morning, Declan -

    I think the point that most people seem to miss here is that AOL's AIM and
ICQ services are owned and operated by AOL, and as such they have the right
to set the terms of use - and this includes not allowing non-AIM or non-ICQ
clients to access their service. There are numerous reasons for such policies,
including protecting their own network and servers (for which most AIM users
pay NOTHING to use, I might add) from potential issues introduced by software
outside of their control, and also whatever revenue they get from 
displaying the
advertisements in the contact list or message window. This is not a question of
anti-trust: consumers still have choices in IM services, as mentioned by B.K.,
such as Yahoo!, MSN and others... and they are just as viable as AIM or ICQ.
The solution here is simple - if you don't like the terms of service, don't 
use the
service - nobody is putting a gun to your head to make you use AIM or ICQ. If
you feel that strongly about it, convince your friends or associates to use a
different service, don't just whine about a company doing what they are 
perfectly
within their rights to do.

--
Gregory Wright (<gwright () ravyn com>)
Ravyn Multimedia
Frederick, MD

---

From: "dan sieradski" <mobiustrip44 () hotmail com>
To: declan () well com
Subject: aol/trillian
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:50:40 -0500

Regarding Trillian and AIM: One of the conditions of AOL's merger with Time 
Warner was that they had to make their IM service interoperable with other 
clients, ie., Trillian.  Unfortunately the interpretation of the ruling 
handed down by the FCC was rendered with loophole that said that this did 
not have to happen until AOL began integrating video into their IM client.
However I called the FCC to double check on this, and the individual I 
spoke to said that, while this was the case, it's possible that there may 
be another way to interpret the ruling and thus, if I could find anything 
in the legalese to say otherwise, we might get them to expand their 
interpretation to require immediate interoperability.  Being that I'm not a 
lawyer, I offer this link to the Politech community, which I was directed 
to by the FCC:

http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/aol-tw-decision.html

If you can find a way, based on this document, to show that the AOL is 
posing a threat in some monopolisitc mannner, we still might be able to get 
'em.

.mobius1
http://www.the44.net/blog

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:37:39 -0300
From: Fernando Cassia <fcassia () compuserve com>
To: declan () well com, bkdelong () pobox com
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

When you log into AIM, you are using AOL's own AIM servers. And they use 
the same
"screen name" validation for all sorts of logins (not just IM). AIM userIDs and
passwords can also be AOL (online service) logins and passwords.

I'd said they have a right to say what software they approve and which one they
don't.

In any case, if you are so pissed at "the big bad AOL empire that eats live 
little
children for breakfast"
I'd suggest you go to http://www.jabber.com, learn about the proposed open 
"jabber"
protocol, and then visit http://jabberzilla.mozdev.org to discover a free, 
open,
xul-based (and hence truly multi-platform!) implementation of a Jabber 
client, that
you can add to the sidebar of Mozilla and other mozilla-based browsers like
Netscape 6.21.

With a jabber client, you can connect (by the use of "gateways") to your ICQ,
Jabber and other IM services, at the same time, with a single client.

Regards

Fernando
Buenos Aires, Argentina

PS: I'm curious about how can an instant messenger "encrypt" content, on a 
single
side, if the user on the other end might or might now use the same IM 
application.
Also let me question the strenght of such encryption...

----

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:34:47 -0500
To: declan () well com
From: "B.K. DeLong" <bkdelong () pobox com>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

At 10:04 AM 02/15/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> Which is bullshit. AOLIM Doesn't have nearly the AOLIM features that
> Trillian has and I'm PISSED that AOL wants me to use a more insecure
> product over an innovative one that provided more of a degree of security,
> logging etc. This sooo smacks of anti-competitive practices.

A GREAT suggestion from another list I'm on:

Donate to Trillian so they can continue to work on solutions to the problem:

http://www.trillian.cc/donate.html

or directly to paypal:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?return=http%3A//www.ceruleanstudios.com/thanks.html&item_name=Trillian&submit.x=44&submit.y=8&business=smw%40ceruleanstudios.com&undefined_quantity=1&cmd=_xclick

And through Amazon:
http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/pay/T3CB0UWUEY2A9H

--
B.K. DeLong
bkdelong () pobox com
617.877.3271

---

From: "David Howe" <DaveHowe () gmx co uk>
To: <declan () well com>
References: <20020215100449.B32098 () cluebot com>
Subject: Re: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 15:53:36 -0000

> Which is bullshit. AOLIM Doesn't have nearly the AOLIM features that
> Trillian has and I'm PISSED that AOL wants me to use a more insecure
> product over an innovative one that provided more of a degree of security,
> logging etc. This sooo smacks of anti-competitive practices.
>
> Am I right? Who's working on a anti-trust case against AOL? Sign me up,
dammit.
Its the same shell game they were playing with MS and the MSN client - As
far as I know though, they *do* have the right to insist you use only their
authorized client to connect to their servers (or indeed, limit usage to
just their own customers). It is a server they pay for and a free service
they provide.. Just as a website can limit use to just MS IE users (but will
get slated for doing so)

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 11:14:04 -0500
To: declan () well com
From: Derek Balling <dredd () megacity org>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

You should point out (or might want to point out) that even though Yahoo 
has made statements regarding AOL's "lack of openness" to third-party 
clients, recent discussion on the libyahoo mailing list, from Yahoo 
employees, indicates that Yahoo is about to also crack down on and actively 
prevent third-party clients from connecting to the service.

D

----

To: declan () well com
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users
From: Rich Wellner <rich () objenv com>
Date: 15 Feb 2002 10:18:28 -0600

Declan,

I don't know if you want to turn this into a software advertising
forum, but FYI, I have no connection with (except as a user) a fine
piece of software called Everybuddy (http://www.everybuddy.com).  It
has many of the features that Trillian does (all I think except
encryption) and is open source (despite being registered at .com).

Over the last few weeks I haven't had any trouble with AIM even while
they lock out Trillian.  I recommend it as another way to fight the
power.

rw2

--
http://poliglut.com
Because the oval office has no corners

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:28:44 -0600
From: "Neil @ geekshanty.com" <poli1 () geekshanty com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

I'm going to have to disagree with Mr. DeLong.  I also use
Trillian and am also unable to connect to AOL with it.  But to suggest
that a lawsuit be filed against AOL for denying access because of
using an unsupported client is outrageous.  AOL is paying for the
servers and network that powers the IM network that you are using.  If
they want you to use their IM client, they have a right to do that.

If a website decides that only Internet Explorer users should be able
to view their content, they can do it.  They are paying for the
website, they can decide who gets to see it.  If you really want to
use AOL's IM network, then you'll use their supported client.

I agree that Trillian is the better of the two clients, but if AOL
wants to play these games its their call.  If it really bothered you
so much you could always switch IM networks.  It is a hassle to switch
over you and all your contacts, but its a far better solution that
suing a company for putting free resources online.

As long as there are other viable alternatives out there, I don't see
any reason to have a lawsuit.  Let the "invisible hand" of the market
take care of this.  If AOL blocking Trillian bothers a lot of people
then they will switch networks, causing AOL to rethink its strategy.

-Neil

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 11:14:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Patty Langasek* <patty () netexpress net>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

Declan,

After sharing the information about AOL blocking Trillian with my husband,
he responded with:

Jabber (http://www.jabber.com/, http://www.jabber.org/) is a truly open
instant-messaging system intended to replace AOL IM.  Although there are
commercial interests involved (Jabber, Inc. builds proprietary
solutions based on the system), the fact that there are Open Source
implementations available, and that anyone can run their own jabber
server, provides built-in protection against the sorts of monopoly
behaviors AOL is engaging in.

Some of the Jabber clients have support for many of Trillian's best
features, including (theoretically -- don't know if any of it still
works) support for ICQ and AIM protocols and PGP-based encryption &
authentication.

Patty Langasek
Website Promotion and Hosting Services
DSL Administration
Internet Express
http://www.netexpress.net

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:27:59 -0500
From: Nat <nathaniel.echols () yale edu>
X-Sender: nat () gibbs csb yale edu
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
cc: politech () politechbot com
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users

> Which is bullshit. AOLIM Doesn't have nearly the AOLIM features that
> Trillian has and I'm PISSED that AOL wants me to use a more insecure
> product over an innovative one that provided more of a degree of security,
> logging etc. This sooo smacks of anti-competitive practices.
> Am I right? Who's working on a anti-trust case against AOL? Sign me up, 
dammit.

Every story I've read that goes into any detail indicates that the problem
is with using AOL's buddy lists, which requires accessing AOL's own
servers.  The IM protocol itself, on the other hand, is easily used and
AOL cannot stop it.  It's just that an AIM client without buddy lists
isn't very useful (frankly, 'ntalk' is already all I need- I've never
used AIM).  Thus AOL is continually patching its servers to keep Trillian,
Yahoo, MS, etc. out of it.  This seems quite fair.

So, at issue is whether AOL has the right to prevent other companies from
using its servers with their software.  If this is not the case, I'd love
to hear it, but if my understanding is correct I'm 100% on AOL's side.  I
find any arguments about monopoly power pretty absurd.

-Nat

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 09:40:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Grady Hare <gradyhareiii () yahoo com>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users
To: declan () well com

It is not really that simple.  I remember (and am
trying to dig it up here) clicking the i agree button
when i first installed the aol software. you would
have had to do that to get a screenname anyway.  in
the agreement i am positive that there was some
language to the effect of no unauthorized client
software.  and i signed up WAY before the MS troubles
with clients.

What it comes down to is that AOL owns the servers and
pays for all the bandwidth on their end. they want to
have all of us users use their client (ie read their
embedded advertising).  that is how they expect to pay
for the bandwidth et al.  Even knowing that i entered
in to this agreement i used the trillian software
because it was spiffy.

It is entirely possible that according to that
agreement aol could wipe my account and force me to
adopt a new name and let all the people i have
communicated with over the years know the
cumorglasabhain is no more.  they chose (so far) not
to go that road.  I consider myself fortunate in this
small respect.

That said, I really liked Trillian and hope sincerely
that they can find some way to come to terms with AOL.
 It allowed many things that aol's didnot.  Most
importantly for me was the fact that it allowed file
transfers with me only having to open up one port in
the firewall.  Something even the also spiffy GAIM
client doesn't manage on the Mandrake box  Now that i
think of it maybe i should go to the other room and
see if AOL is kicking them off too.

nope not yet.

---

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:46:50 -0500
From: Jamie McCarthy <jamie () mccarthy vg>
Subject: Re: FC: AOL again blocks Trillian instant messaging users
To: declan () well com

declan () well com (Declan McCullagh) writes:

> Am I right? Who's working on a anti-trust case against AOL? Sign
> me up, dammit.

Nah, AOL's toast.  Microsoft's instant-messaging software will crush
AOL long before such a suit would be resolved.  It's just a matter
of time, give it a couple of years.

All AOL had on their side was the largest installed base of both the
software -- triple that of MSN Messenger in late 2000 -- and the
pipes to connect tens of millions of users.

Network-effect math used to mean something.  But last summer
Microsoft started shipping its own IM software along with the
operating system (precisely what the antitrust suit was intended
to prevent).  As long as Microsoft's product isn't too much worse
than the prevailing standard, they win.
--
 Jamie McCarthy
 jamie () mccarthy vg

---




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------