Royce Dickens, FCC Cable Service Bureau deputy chief of the policy and rules division, probed America Online's pledge to develop an interoperability standard for instant messaging, and if AOL was actively working to set such standards.

In its reply to the Commission earlier this week, AOL noted that it pioneered the concept of instant messaging in 1985 and unveiled the first service to its members in 1989. At that time, instant messaging was available only to AOL subscribers, according to the firm's attorneys.

AOL said it recognized the popularity of its proprietary instant messaging service in 1997 and began giving away for free to anyone on the Web.

Since then, AOL has also entered more than a dozen royalty-free license agreements with other companies-including Lotus, Lycos Inc., EarthLink Inc. and other Internet service providers.

Additionally, AOL stated that it has and continues to support efforts to create an open and interoperable standard that would allow users to exchange instant messages across different instant messaging networks.

To that end, AOL submitted its proposal to the Internet Engineering Task Force about how to best achieve the goal of interoperability mid-June.

AOL's proposal included the architecture to design a worldwide instant messaging system. In doing so, AOL legal representatives said the proposal represents a significant step toward the development of detailed protocols for implementing full instant messaging interoperability.

Rival instant messaging firms quickly challenged AOL's integrity and acceptance of developing an open standard.

LATEST NEWS

New Calls for Global Web Censorship Probe
Murdoch Balks at Twitter Buy, MySpace Sale
Breaches Hit 70% of UK Enterprises, Study Finds
Senate Nears Vote on Rethinking U.S. Spectrum
Why IE Doesn't Support HTML 5 Video (Yet)

At the same time AOL's IETF proposal was submitted, it was playing a cat-and-mouse game resisting unauthorized attempts by Odigo Inc. to access its instant messaging network.

Avner Ronen, Odigo vice president of strategic design, scoffed at AOL's professed desire for open standards.

"What AOL has posted is no more than an outline for interoperability," Ronen said. "On the surface, great, they are committed. However, they have claimed commitment for over one year now. This outline has no time-frame and no specific architecture. AOL's announcement does not bring us any closer to a standard platform."

AOL said that allowing outside companies to access its instant messaging servers would jeopardize the security and privacy of its 23 million members and 50 million instant messaging users.

AOL legal representatives alleged that had e-mail protocols been as deliberate as its instant messaging system, unsolicited e-mail, or spam, and e-mail borne viruses would not afflict the online community today.

The legal team of Peter Ross, Wiley, Rein & Fielding, and Arthur Harding,, Fleischman and Walsh, L.L.P., informed the FCC that the best way to access alternative instant messaging providers is to secure a royalty-free licensing agreement with AOL.

"AOL does not demand payment in exchange for use of its IM technology. Likewise, AOL does not pay for access to other providers' customers," the lawyers wrote.

AOL's legal team contends that because most of the instant messaging services are free to use, consumers can choose the program-or programs-that best meet their needs. Even without interoperability, Internet users canexchange instant messages, regardless of their preferred instant messaging provider.

To do so, consumers must download a multitude of programs to interact with non-AOL instant messaging users. AOL contends that such a system opens up consumers to security issues, because they must disclose their passwords whenever they send messages across systems.

AOL told the FCC it has the best approach for developing worldwide instant messaging interoperability. Its proposed architectural design resolves the technical, security, and privacy-related challenges of building a secure and open system.

While AOL attempts to make instant messaging a non-issue with the FCC so it can obtain the go-ahead to acquire Time Warner, Americas largest online service provider remains steadfast in its commitment to guaranteeing the privacy and security of its instant messaging users.

This commitment to security has been contested in other areas of AOL's services.

While AOL members are assured at every point of contact that their information is secure from potential maliciousness, Observers.net recently shared information with the public about how easily AOL's firewalls can be violated.

Kelly Hallissey, Observers.net benevolent hackers, said AOL has the wrong attitude about being invulnerable to outside forces.

"They have depended upon their firewall, the premise that this latest publicized breach is new, is erroneous," Hallissey said. "It's the same technique that has been used for over 1 year. Why didn't AOL do anything about it? Why haven't they closed it yet? They were blindsided with how widespread the intrusions became. Now, AOL has to playing catch up again."

Whether AOL's security breaches remain an issue for the company or the security hole is simply a lure to catch hackers, the firm clearly restated its commitment to instant messaging users security and privacy concerns in its pitch to the FCC.

Although the FCC would not comment on AOL's explanation of its instant messaging services, the "hands off" policy stance that permeates the federal regulators approach to Internet issues will likely allow the IETF to resolve the subject of interoperability between systems.

The IETF is scheduled to release its working group's findings from industry proposals it collected in June, sometime in mid-July.