Decision Postponed in MonsterHut vs. PaeTec Communications
PaeTec has been trying to void its contract with MonsterHut because it claims the Niagara Falls, NY-based firm is a spammer.
New York state Supreme Court Justice John Lane has postponed his decision until June 4 to give the court time to consider 97 new affidavits introduced in defense of PaeTec Communications, an Internet service provider. The new affidavits are in addition to 86 previously introduced into evidence.
In March, Lane issued a temporary restraining order in the case allowing MonsterHut, a distributor of permission-based e-mail, to continue sending bulk e-mail through PaeTec Communications.
The temporary restraining order prohibited Fairport, NY-based PaeTec from canceling MonsterHut's contract until May 21, when the case was to be decided.
MonsterHut denies being a spammer and said it sends e-mail only to its opt-in list. It would not say how large its list is or how many messages were sent that led to the spamming allegation.
"We are prepared to argue our case," said Todd Pelow, MonsterHut's CEO, "PaeTec is obviously not."
PaeTec, however, said it is confident it would win.
"PaeTec now has submitted sworn proof from 183 disinterested individuals who are from 39 states and four foreign countries," said Robert Kirchner, a partner at Bond, Schoeneck & King LLP, Syracuse, NY, PaeTec Communication's law firm.
"Each of these affidavits alleges that they have been spammed by MonsterHut," Kirchner said. "By contrast, MonsterHut's sole 'proof' that it had been solicited is its employees' hollow claims that they `could' submit proof that each individual opted in to receive e-mail even though they have not done so and even though MonsterHut refused to respond to PaeTec's outstanding discovery demands seeking, among other things, this very proof."