>From an antitrust perspective, giving away something for free isn't generally seen as benevolent, it is often seen as predatory. Microsoft got in a lot of trou

>From an antitrust perspective, giving away something for free isn't generally seen as benevolent, it is often seen as predatory. Microsoft got in a lot of trouble for giving away IE "for free." They did it to kill Netscape's business model. It's predatory (dumping) if they lower prices to kill off competitors and then raise prices later. I don't see them doing that, at least with GMail; can't imagine them charging for it. >A healthy market isn't one company giving things away for free, making their money indirectly, and squashing all competitors. A healthy market is one that generates the most value for consumers. I don't see how consumers win if the government kills off all free email providers and forces people to pay for what they were previous getting for free.