This is a rather nice little bonus for AOL subscribers, assuming they don't jack the subscription rates up. On the other hand, it seems like the sites are going to be completely shuttered, which is stupid. There's no mention of even reduced or teaser content for free(ie: Salon's model). I'm assuming this is an oversight or oversimplification in the article.

I wonder if the company has prepared for the obvious password site backlash(unique logins, logged for multiple access from multiple IPs, etc), or if they're blindly assuming the honor system will work. That would be sad.

I'm assuming the passwording will be fairly open. People getting the online password from the print issue will undoubtedly let the password slip, but I think that's a fairly accurate analog to the passalong readership figures in a circulation report.

unless there's additional content on the magazine websites, why would someone who has just bought an issue on the newsstand bother looking for the page with the password, entering it in online, and reading the same thing on the screen that they just read while sitting on the toilet drinking a V8?

And now we all know just that little bit more than too much about Alison.

Somehow I glossed over the bit about the newsstand editions having passwords in them. I don't think I've ever been to the sites for any of these magazines, but is it safe to assume they don't offer much in the way or archives, then? A one-week pass and a site ripper could do a lot of damage if you're not that concerned in the latest-breaking info.
Then again, I'd venture that the readership of Cooking Light wouldn't likely be going that route.
I'm probably ascribing a little too much value to the contents of People magazine, but it's conceivable that more control might be wanted at some point in the future, and it's probably better/easier to take care of those details up front.

Thanks for bringing this up. I have a meeting with the Time Inc. technology team tomorrow and will bring up this very post.