This posting made from the web-site.  Please reply via
email in addition to the group.  Thanks.

   Firstly I wish to apologize for this rather longish spam reply but ,being gun shy 
to replying to anything doing with spam, I really don't know if this is a bonofide 
request or not..I really am confused as to what course to take...Should I comply or 
ignore this request?... awaiting input from those more learned than moi...:

X-POP3-Rcpt: 
                                                kenge@sam
                      Received: 
                                                from exch-corp.paetec.com 
(dmz-host-pat.paetec.com
                                                [216.42.84.31]) by 
sam.julianhaight.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with
                                                ESMTP id f3NCtv307286 for 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon,
                                                23 Apr 2001 08:55:57 -0400
                      Received: 
                                                by exch-corp.paetec.com with Internet 
Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
                                                id <JH0CH105>; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 
09:03:11 -0400
                Message-ID: 
                                                
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
                                From: 
                                                IP Admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
                                      To: 
                                                kenge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
                        Subject: 
                                                RE: [SpamCop 
(http://www.monsterhut.com) id:22786923] Send
                                                someon e a special gift from 
Proflowers.com
                                Date: 
                                                Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:59:56 -0400
           MIME-Version: 
                                                1.0
                      X-Mailer: 
                                                Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
           Content-Type: 
                                                text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Mozilla-Status: 
                                                0011


PaeTec Communications, Inc. received the attached complaint from you
regarding your contention that you received spam, i.e., that you received an
unsolicited, commercial, bulk e-mail. PaeTec is an integrated
telecommunications provider which offers access to the Internet to
businesses. PaeTec strongly opposes spamming. The e-mail about which you
complained originated from a customer of PaeTec's by the name of MonsterHut.


PaeTec's agreement with MonsterHut expressly prohibits the sending of spam.
In reliance on the complaints it received from you and others stating that
the e-mail you received from MonsterHut was spam, PaeTec informed MonsterHut
that it was terminating its contract. 


MonsterHut responded by commencing litigation against PaeTec. Prior to
PaeTec being advised of the existence of the litigation, MonsterHut obtained
a temporary restraining order from the Court, which prevents PaeTec from
terminating MonsterHut's contract pending a hearing at which both sides can
present evidence. The only proof before the Court at the time it issued the
injunction was MonsterHut's claim that it had received permission from the
recipients, such as yourself, to send the e-mail, and therefore, the e-mail
was not spam. PaeTec has disputed MonsterHut's assertion and has demanded
that MonsterHut prove that you and the other recipients solicited the
e-mail. MonsterHut has also claimed that virtually every complaint PaeTec
received was simply a request to be removed from MonsterHut's mailing lists
and was not an allegation that its e-mail was spam. PaeTec interprets your
communication as not simply requesting removal, but complaining that the
e-mail was spam.


It would be very helpful for PaeTec to obtain sworn statements, which are
also known as affidavits, from you and others stating (if true) that, to the
best of your knowledge, you did not solicit e-mails from MonsterHut, you did
not opt-in to being included on the mailing list of MonsterHut, you did not
opt-in to be included on any mailing list that indicated you were
authorizing the sending of e-mails by other unspecified parties, and that
your complaint was not merely a request to have your name removed from a
mailing list. If you are willing to assist PaeTec in its efforts to vacate
the injunction and terminate MonsterHut's Internet access service, please
follow the instructions at http://litigation.paetec.net. On the other hand,
if you did solicit e-mail from MonsterHut and/or if you intended merely to
request that your name and address be removed from MonsterHut's mailing
list, PaeTec would appreciate it if you would advise it of those facts so
that it can take them into account in deciding whether to pursue a
termination of MonsterHut's service. If you have any questions, please
contact us at mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
SpamCop-Help mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.spamcop.net/mailman/listinfo/spamcop-help

Reply via email to