This past March, I started getting dozens of e-mails from upset
but resigned AT&T Broadband customers. All said more or less the
same thing: their e-mail addresses were about to stop working. I had
to update my address book to change the letters after the @ sign
from “mediaone.net” to “attbi.com.”
More than 630,000 AT&T customers were forced to make this
change. They could have used the occasion to simply and
inexpensively assert their electronic individuality and
independence. Instead, the majority behaved like good sheep and did
what they were told: moved from one mega-corporate address that they
didn’t own to another. Baa-a-a-a! Baa-a-a-a!
Few people realize just how much control over the increasingly
pervasive medium of e-mail they have tacitly conceded. Many, for
instance, think that they somehow own their e-mail addresses. Wrong!
Legally and technically, the company, university or individual who
owns the computer systems behind an e-mail address controls all
aspects of the accounts it serves. In fact, the addresses belong to
the company whose name comes after the @. (In the case of
mediaone.net, AT&T relinquished the name to another Media One,
an advertising agency in Sioux Falls, SD, to settle a lawsuit.)
You may think you’re entitled to an e-mail address because you’ve
religiously paid some Internet service provider your monthly
subscription fee for years. That’s not the case. Your provider can
cancel your e-mail account for any reason and bounce your e-mail. Or
it can give your username—and your e-mail!—to somebody else. Or it
can lock you out of your account and read your e-mail without your
permission. (Having owned a small Internet service provider since
1995, I know well the responsibilities and dilemmas that come with
this awesome power.)
In one case that I know, a person had used the same corporate
e-mail address for both his business and personal communications for
several years. This seemed reasonable—after all, he had cofounded
the company. But he was fired in a power struggle, and the new
president decided to read all the personal e-mail that kept
trickling into this fellow’s account. This was all perfectly legal:
the company’s computer policy explicitly said that e-mail messages
were the property of the business and could be read by management
for any reason. In another instance, a friend lost her Internet
account after she got into an argument with the firm providing her
Internet service. But rather than canceling her username, the
provider simply changed her password. Mail to her old address
accumulated for months, unread. People who send messages to her old
address still get the response that her mailbox is full.
E-mail is tremendously different from the two other addressing
systems that we use routinely—postal addresses and telephone
numbers. Because postal addresses are covered by a huge body of
regulations and laws, and because most are linked to physical
locations, they work pretty much the way we expect them to. If you
move, the U.S. Postal Service will forward mail to your new
residence. It will not, however, forward the mail from your old
place of work to a new one, even if you ask extra nicely; that’s the
job of the business.
Telephone numbers, on the other hand, are increasingly regarded
by law as the property of the person or organization to which they
connect. In fact, the 1996 U.S. Telecommunications Act specifically
requires telephone companies to create a framework for telephone
number portability, so that businesses and residences can switch
phone service providers without losing their phone numbers.
But the Telecommunications Act was silent on the subject of
e-mail addresses. The U.S. Congress didn’t think to mandate e-mail
address portability. It didn’t even mandate the next best
thing—e-mail forwarding. If you are an America Online user and
decide that you want to switch to another Internet provider, the
only thing you can do is send mail to all of your correspondents,
telling them of your new address. AOL will not forward your
mail.
What’s so distressing about this state of affairs is that there
is a simple solution to the problem of e-mail address portability.
Every person and every company should get a unique domain name.
Recall that the domain name is the part of the e-mail address
after the @ sign. Years ago there were attempts by the Internet’s
inventors to limit the proliferation of names for technical
reasons—people were worried that there might be too many of them. As
a result, domain names were made expensive. But those days are long
gone. Nowadays you can get your own domain name for less than $25 a
year from any of a number of companies. And these names are
portable—that is, you can take them with you from one Internet
service provider to another.
Of course, people are taught to be sheep for a reason. Customers
tied to @attbi.com or @aol.com addresses are inhibited from
switching to a rival service provider—which ultimately means that
the companies don’t have to compete as hard. That’s why neither
AT&T nor AOL has worked to make it easy for customers to have
their own domains.
In the 21st century, having your own domain name is simple
electronic self-defense. Alas, many people find it easier to be
sheep.