>>Might the real problem at the moment (availability of pay-per-use web services) be that MS hasn't yet delivered the metering/charging mechanism(s) to enable people to do so.
>>
>>Might it be that, for MS to do so any time soon, they would have to tip their hand regarding their plans in more concrete terms?. . .In other words, if MS plans itself to be the arbitor (middleman) between service buyer/seller, saying so now is too dangerous to their plans.
>
>Not sure. It seems though that you could implement a monthly or fee-per-use system quite easily without MS Passport.
>
>The UT has public webservice available for a yearly fee. This is rolled into the PUTM.

Sure, but relatively speaking that is an administrative nightmare. I think that people envision chargeable requests coming in from around the world at rates like 100s per minute, probably from a million or more customers. Unless there is something better to handle this, there ain't much hope, as I see it.

Now I think that MS has plans in that regard, and I bet they're being very very cautious and wary as regards anyone even coming close to any similar idea.
I think that MS wants to be the channel through which ALL web traffic passes.