According to the press (Hu, 2002), AOL is one of the companies to
             start charging fees for their Instant Messenger (IM) Service. The reason
             cited for this is the decline of advertising revenues in the Internet
             context, coupled with a declining subscriber growth. Thus nonmembers are
             charged fees for certain features of the Instant Messenger.
             It is understandable that AOL would want to explore revenue
             generating options in the Internet economic climate. I don not believe
             that this is as such unethical, since members continue to enjoy the service
             free of charge. Whether charging fees for IM services is the best way to
             pursue their financial goals is however questionable. The concern of Yahoo
             and MSN, that this feature would drive customers to competitors, is not an
             invalid one. It is possible that if the service is not made unique enough,
             competitors will take over much of AOL's clientele. The company could thus
             sustain substantial losses in both revenue and clientele. Thus AOL could
             sustain substantial losses in terms of both revenues and subscribers. A
             better proposition could be to charge fees for a different version of the
             Instant Messenger - such as an IM service specifically designed for
             Because IM services are still offered for free by several companies,
             I do not believe that adding fees to those offered by some companies will
             pose a problem for users who cannot afford to pay. Fortunately there are
             still many options available in terms of IM services on the Internet.
             Depending on the quality of the product required, the user has the choice
             of payment or nonpayment. As long as this possibility exists, I believe
             that companies should also have the choice of whether or not to charge
             ...