They're young, tech-literate, and generally seeking meaningful interaction in the seams of cyberspace. Having discovered ICQ by word of mouth, they downloaded the chat software because, unlike most of the other chat or instant-messaging wares on the Net, ICQ was that online rarity: a widely used, high-quality, but completely non-commercial utility. And they use it for everything from exchanging jokes to swapping phone-phreaking tips and transferring data files.
Now, they've been turned into AOLers. And they're none too happy.
Monday's announcement that America Online Inc. (AOL), the country's largest online service provider, had purchased Israel's Mirabilis Ltd. and its hugely popular ICQ chat software for US$400 million has touched off a firestorm of reaction from ICQ users. Many fear that AOL will transform the service from a free, uncensored hangout for the digitally hip into another commercial outlet overrun with spam, noise, and newbies -- and charge a fee, to boot.
"I am a loyal user of ICQ. However, I'm uninstalling it this moment due to its [acquisition]," said Chris Casnova, a long-time ICQ user who lives in Bellingham, Washington. He is concerned there will be "banners, monopolization, virus-like install programs, false promises ... and a nice bloated program to take up PC time."
Though no organized user protest has surfaced, a number of ICQ's 13 million members who seem to feel similarly have vented their skepticism about AOL to Mirabilis.
On Monday, the company posted a lengthy letter to users on the ICQ download site, in which it acknowledged an "overwhelming" flood of concerned messages to the company during recent weeks, when rumors of the deal began circulating on the Internet.
The letter explains the difficulties the free service is experiencing as it grows at a rate of 1 million new subscribers every 22 days and how AOL will help it navigate such testy waters. It goes to great lengths to portray AOL as a partner with an interest in communication and community -- and tried to assuage the biggest user concern, promising that, for the time being at least, ICQ will remain free.
"Not many [complaints] were addressed directly to us, but we followed the ones posted on various Net places," said Yossi Vardi, chairman of Mirabilis, who estimated that the number of users who took the time to speak up on discussion boards, other chat forums, and reader-response sites was "probably in the thousands."
And Mirabilis wasn't the only target of users' ire. When Patrick Keane, an Internet commerce analyst at Jupiter Communications, told CNET's News.com last month that AOL's goal in acquiring ICQ might be "to own the user," he received numerous angry phone and email messages from ICQ users.
"I've never had consumers calling me irate like that over something I said about a company," Keane chuckled.
But, according to Vardi, concerns that AOL ownership will taint the ICQ service are largely unfounded.
"I believe that what matters is the quality of the offering and not the ownership," said Vardi. "We will continue to do our utmost to provide our users with the most fantastic Internet experience the world ever knew.... Wait a few weeks until you see our new client, and please judge for yourself."
Vardi noted that most messages directed to the company had expressed concerns over whether the company would begin charging for ICQ or whether users would be forced to sign up for America Online's proprietary online service.
"The program will continue to be [available as a] time-limited free beta, exactly like what we have done since our inception," said Vardi. "It will be available no matter who is your Internet service provider. AOL asked us to continue to run the program exactly as we run it now, no changes whatsoever."
Vardi did acknowledge that AOL expects to earn back its investment in the company. It paid $287 million up front with the promise of additional payments contingent on undisclosed events, which could bring the total to $400 million, for a 100 percent stake in the company. But, he said, revenue will likely be sought through advertising rather than user charges.
"AOL will have to make up its mind, but I have no doubt that most of the users will prefer to have reasonably placed banners rather then paying -- which is not considered at this point of time," said Vardi, noting that a company survey of users last year found that 92 percent preferred advertising to subscription fees or charges for the software.
For its part, AOL recognizes that ICQ users are skeptical about its intentions. But according to AOL spokeswoman Tricia Primrose, the company looks forward to trying to meet the needs of a new audience.
"We don't wanna muck with success ... and we've been very cognizant of what's made ICQ successful," said Primrose. "We totally recognize that ICQ appeals to a different market segment from the America Online service, and that's the good news for us: It means we can help serve the needs of an entirely new type of user that we've previously never reached. "We absolutely intend to keep ICQ's attitude, service, and functionality intact. That's a large part of why we are keeping the ICQ brand completely separate from AOL."
Still, some are concerned that AOL's intent of making money and turning ICQ into a mass-market product will lead it to place restraints on use of the software itself.
"I worry about any family-based organization taking over much of anything because inevitably concerns arise over 'family values,'" said Suzanne Goodney, a graduate student in sociology at Indiana University, who noted the infamous debacle in which AOL banned use of the word "breast" in its chat areas until breast-cancer survivors complained.
That worry may not be unfounded, according to Keane, who said that commercial chat sites on the Internet have had a hard time selling advertisements due to the fact that they might appear next to someone's, uh, ode to Ginger Spice or Pamela Anderson.
Nonetheless, users are hopeful that the spirit that has made ICQ an underground hit over its 18-month history will live on.
"Ultimately, corporations with their interests in increasing profit margins ... will muddle themselves in all sorts of indie stuff," said Goodney. "But the cool thing about the indie realm is that it's creative and not tied to profit and is thus inclined toward re-invention -- thriving on that, even."
