Alpine Capital Publishing - legal threats against an ISP that uses SPEWS, pulling some "Electronic Communications Privacy Act", pretending that ISPs are somehow bound to it in managing of their own private property, while not being common carriers. P.S. They've spammed, too. onthemoney.com, alpinecapital.net, stealthstocksonline.com, alpinecapitalmanagement.com, [128.121.117.114]: Access denied! === Evidence === Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!lenny.tc.umn.edu!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "John Salyers" Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email Subject: Spews S2638 Cartooney Lines: 410 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:58:43 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.206.38.8 X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1054317402 216.206.38.8 (Fri, 30 May 2003 12:56:42 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 12:56:42 CDT Xref: uni-berlin.de news.admin.net-abuse.email:1997837 And he wants a response after this statement. "Be aware that your communication with us will be placed into our legal folder for possible legal arbitration and class action law suit(s) to obtain relief for financial damages to our clients' portfolios and to seek allowed damages in the violation of the Electronic Communications Act." Kind of long winded: Received: from SMTP32-FWD by cros.net (SMTP32) id A00000E54; Fri, 30 May 2003 13:23:48 -0400 Received: from smtp3.cros.net [216.206.238.47] by cros.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.15) id A3A449302BA; Fri, 30 May 2003 13:23:48 -0400 Received: from localhost (smtp3.cros.net [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.cros.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C73D410AA; Fri, 30 May 2003 13:23:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from alpinecapital.net (alpinecapital.net [128.121.117.114]) by smtp3.cros.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1461F10C4; Fri, 30 May 2003 13:23:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ats1 (1-0.brd2.noc.orem.fiber.net [204.250.211.105]) by alpinecapital.net (8.12.9) id h4UHPfWB019816; Fri, 30 May 2003 17:25:50 GMT From: "Bruce Armstrong (OTM)" To: <****@cros.net> Cc: <****@thirdplanet.net> Subject: FW: Returned mail: see transcript for details Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 11:25:41 -0600 Message-ID: <006001c326d0$82971ba0$0300a8c0@ats1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0061_01C3269E.37FCABA0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020300 Status: U X-UIDL: 345153736 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0061_01C3269E.37FCABA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ATT: Spam Abuse / Blacklist Abuse My name is Bruce Armstrong, Vice President of Alpine Capital Publishing. We publish a newsletter and website called www.onthemoney.com As you can see from the contents below your facility is blocking legitimate email that we are trying to send to one of our clients: ******** (******@thirdplanet.net) The attachment titled "Thu" is an example of a financial newsletter that we send out each evening and that Donald has been unable to receive for some time. If you check out our IP address you will find that the osirusof and / or spews data is incorrect and as a result you are blocking legitimate email. Please read the attached "BlackList Letter" for more information on the viability of the blacklists you are using and the implications of using them. Please correct this so our client can receive the paid-for email newsletter that we are trying to send to him each night. Regards, Bruce Armstrong Vice President, Alpine Capital Publishing bruce@onthemoney.com 800-772-5789 -----Original Message----- From: MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem) [mailto:MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem)] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 6:07 PM To: alpineca Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details The original message was received at Thu, 29 May 2003 18:06:27 -0600 (MDT) from alpineca@localhost ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ****@thirdplanet.net (reason: 554 Service unavailable; [128.121.117.114] blocked using relays.osirusoft.com, reason: [1] lowlowmortgagequotes, see http://spews.org/ask.cgi?S2638) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mx.cros.net.: >>> DATA <<< 554 Service unavailable; [128.121.117.114] blocked using relays.osirusoft.com, reason: [1] lowlowmortgagequotes, see http://spews.org/ask.cgi?S2638 554 5.0.0 Service unavailable <<< 554 Error: no valid recipients ------=_NextPart_000_0061_01C3269E.37FCABA0 Content-Type: message/delivery-status; name="details.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="details.txt" Reporting-MTA: dns; alpinecapital.net Arrival-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:06:27 -0600 (MDT) Final-Recipient: rfc822; ****@thirdplanet.net Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Remote-MTA: dns; mx.cros.net Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554 Service unavailable; [128.121.117.114] blocked using relays.osirusoft.com, reason: [1] lowlowmortgagequotes, see http://spews.org/ask.cgi?S2638 Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:06:44 -0600 (MDT) ------=_NextPart_000_0061_01C3269E.37FCABA0 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment From: To: <*****@thirdplanet.net> Subject: OnTheMoney Update - 5/29/03:Thu Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:06:27 -0600 Message-ID: <200305300006.h4U06RJk010288@alpinecapital.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005C_01C3269E.37F7C9A0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_005C_01C3269E.37F7C9A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you use AOL and this email is too large, AOL will turn it into an unreadable attachment. If you cannot read this Market Update, please log in to the web site and view it.=20 =20 www.OnTheMoney.com Market Update 517 Mountainville Dr. Alpine, UT 84004 (800)772-5789=20 Attachment contents: Dear Sirs: Your company (ISP) or service provider (ISP) has inappropriately blocked legitimate email from our company to one of our clients that has an email address with you. My name is Bruce Armstrong, (bruce@onthemoney.com, 801-756-3605) and I am Vice President of Alpine Capital Publishing. We provide timely, financial trading signals (BUYS and SELLS in the stock market) for a fee. We also publish our advisory information on our web sites: (www.OnTheMoney.com, www.StealthStocksOnline.com, and www.AlpineCapitalManagement.com). You are to be commended in your attempts to minimize SPAM as an ISP. However, the path you have taken is a slippery slope. You have chosen to put your trust in one of the two blacklists below and as a result are guilty of intentionally blocking legitimate email. It is very important that our information reach our clients on the day that we make a BUY or SELL decision. Delaying an important SELL signal by a day or two, or missing it altogether because an ISP is blocking email communication, can result in thousands of dollars in damage to our client's investment portfolio assets. Our IP address is 128.121.117.114 and it is a fixed IP address assigned only to our company and used only for our web sites and email communication with our clients. Although you may find that our IP address might show up on one of these two blacklists, if you thoroughly investigate the links they report you will discover that our specific IP address has never been tagged as SPAM and the blacklist inclusion is invalid, by unauthorized association with a web hosting company, and probably illegal. We hereby declare that we are not sending SPAM and challenge you or anyone else to prove otherwise. The two offending blacklists are: SPEWS: http://www.spews.org/ OSIRUSOFT: http://relays.osirusoft.com/ There are at least 30 other black lists available to ISPs and if you check them out you will find that our IP address is not on them. The only black list that our IP is possibly on is one of the two mentioned or those who import one or both of these two blacklists. (In fact, osirusoft imports the spews database.) Links have been included at the end of this letter that you are encouraged to check out and thus become better educated. Find out who and what is behind OSIRUSOFT and SPEWS. Responsible ISPs utilize many tools to minimize SPAM, but few explicitly trust the classifications reported by these two particular blacklists. There are serious legal issues utilizing ANY DNS blacklist, and many law suits have successfully demonstrated this, but these two particular blacklists contain the most egregious mistakes and errors in classification. The fact that you rely upon either of these two blacklists indicates to us that you have not taken sufficient time examining the SPAM problem or you have not acted responsibly toward your own customers and their right to receive timely, legitimate email. There is an even bigger issue with the fact that, as a provider of electronic communication, you are likely in violation of a Federal Communications Act (Federal legislation known as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1996, as codified in 18 USC 2701(a)(2), forbids anyone to intentionally exceed an authorization to access stored electronic communications, thereby preventing authorized access of a user to a communication of or intended for that user.) This letter is to serve as a notice that you have blocked and may be currently blocking legitimate financial communication (email) to one of our clients and one or more of your own customers. My current recommendation to the individual(s) involved is to contact you, as their ISP, and see if they can arrange for you to enable your email servers such that our email communication to them is not impeded in any way, shape or form. If you cannot do this I recommend that they drop your service and find another Internet Service Provider, one that will act more responsible and allow this important financial communication to take place. The act of email blocking is not an inconsequential decision. It is comparable to a third party going around and removing all of the mail in all of the mailboxes in a community because someone in their community sent some unsolicited junk mail to someone else in their community. Do you think the legal system would justify that activity? That is precisely what you are doing to our email communications. Our determination is that blocking legitimate email is a criminal Federal offense, just like tampering with the U.S. postal service, and has been successfully prosecuted under the Electronic Communications Act! We request that you correct this situation so that your company will not become an implicated ISP in a class action lawsuit that covers several ISPs that refuse to act responsibly in their charge to facilitate legally binding electronic communication from Alpine Capital Publishing (and other similar companies) to clients like your customer. We hate SPAM as much as anyone else, but not at the expense of blocking important and legitimate email. As an ISP you have the right to choose how you block email, but to entrust this important decision to a third-party blacklist may not be a legally wise thing to do. There are other ways. You are advised to seek other alternatives. The following links will assist you in gaining further education on this matter and demonstrate that our IP address is a valid and legitimate email source for your customers. We request that you respond to this inquiry, both to your own customer(s) and to us. Reply or email bruce@onthemoney.com with your comments and decisions. Be aware that your communication with us will be placed into our legal folder for possible legal arbitration and class action law suit(s) to obtain relief for financial damages to our clients' portfolios and to seek allowed damages in the violation of the Electronic Communications Act. LINKS: 1) Who is OSIRUSOFT and why is their blacklist faulty? http://www.info-world.com/spam.diagnosis/ http://www.dotcomeon.com/nowhere.html 2) Who is SPEWS and why is their blacklist faulty? http://www.clapper.org/spam/spews.html http://www.antispews.org/no_spews_overview.asp http://www.internetnews.com/IAR/print.php/1143551 http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/enterprise/story/0,2000048640,20266475,00.h tm http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-030205spam,0,4425232.story?coll =chi-techtopheds-hed http://www.dotcomeon.com/tel_pacific.html 3) Is there a precedent for suing the blacklist owner and ISPs who use them improperly to block legitimate email? YES http://www.mail-archive.com/isp-tech@isp-tech.com/msg04290.html (Very few ISPs have permission to block legitimate, non-spamemail. So not only are they also subject to the same issues as theblacklist, they are also violating the Electronic Communications PrivacyAct. This provides for a minimum of $1000 per affected user, plus attorney fees (not merely court costs).http://www.dotcomeon.com/exactis1.html 4) Should an ISP risk using a blacklist to block all email?http://www.access-interactive.net/articles/stopspam.htm 5) Is there a better SPAM control than using Osirusoft or SPEWS? YES - use SpamCOPhttp://www.antispews.org/no_spews_usespamcop.asp 6) What blacklists demonstrate that www.OnTheMoney.com, www.StealthStocksOnline.com, and www.AlpineCapitalManagement.com are legitimate by virtue of not being included (all with IP address: 128.121.117.114)? http://relays.osirusoft.com/cgi-bin/rbcheck.cgi?addr=128.121.117.114 (even osirusoft demonstrates that our IP address should not be blacklisted) Regards, Bruce Armstrong Vice President, Alpine Capital Publishing bruce@onthemoney.com (801) 756-3605 Alpine Capital Publishing 517 Mountainville Dr. Alpine, UT 84004 === Evidence, the followup === Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com !news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED !not-for-mail From: "John Salyers" Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email References: Subject: Re: Spews S2638 Cartooney Lines: 124 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 16:36:16 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.206.38.8 X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1054326854 216.206.38.8 (Fri, 30 May 2003 15:34:14 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 15:34:14 CDT Xref: uni-berlin.de news.admin.net-abuse.email:1997986 > Just think about all the responces, that he is getting now. > http://www.DolphinWave.org/spam/128.121.117.114_AlpineCapital.txt > > Fun, he is triple blocked here, for being in SPEWS, on Verio, and > an @$$hole. > You said it. Here is his response to my whitelisting options. -----Original Message----- From: postmaster@cros.net [mailto:postmaster@cros.net] Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 12:45 PM To: Bruce Armstrong (OTM) Cc: *****@thirdplanet.net Subject: Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details Mr. Armstrong, Whitelisting a spam source would be in violation of our contract with our customers to keep spam out of their inboxes. Our customers have the option of having their email account whitelisted if they want to receive spam. I am copying our customer on this response and will be happy to remove their account from our spam filters if they wish. postmaster@cros.net Received: from SMTP32-FWD by cros.net (SMTP32) id A000003F0; Fri, 30 May 2003 16:05:58 -0400 Received: from smtp3.cros.net [216.206.238.47] by cros.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.15) id A9A664602F8; Fri, 30 May 2003 16:05:58 -0400 Received: from localhost (smtp3.cros.net [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.cros.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A09C51158 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 16:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from alpinecapital.net (alpinecapital.net [128.121.117.114]) by smtp3.cros.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D3691163 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 16:05:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ats1 (1-0.brd2.noc.orem.fiber.net [204.250.211.105]) by alpinecapital.net (8.12.9) id h4UK7kAl007812; Fri, 30 May 2003 20:07:55 GMT From: "Bruce Armstrong (OTM)" To: Cc: <*****@thirdplanet.net> Subject: RE: Returned mail: see transcript for details Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:07:46 -0600 Message-ID: <00a001c326e7$26f22490$0300a8c0@ats1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C326B4.DC57B490" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-Reply-To: <09a301c326db$8e425130$0826ced8@pcstat> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020300 Status: U X-UIDL: 345154022 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00A1_01C326B4.DC57B490 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Postmaster: Apparently you do not have the ability to whitelist a non-spam source, like www.onthemoney.com (128.121.117.114). You may be the only ISP I have talked with that can provide ability for legitimate email sources. Apparently you have no way to correct for the database errors that exist in the third party blacklists that you use. Apparently your customer can only choose to either opt-in or opt-out of your version of spam control and accept the blocking of legitimate email as a consequence. Apparently you do not have the ability to identify a specific IP address that is not guilty of spam and therefore allow your customer to have spam control AND the legitimate financial newsletter that he has paid us for. Apparently you did not look at the email message (newsletter) that we are trying to send to him via his email address and come to the conclusion that it was, indeed, not spam. Apparently you did not take time to look at the Blacklist Letter that I sent to you, or if you did you certainly must disagree with about everything I said in it, in particular about the fact that your company may, indeed, be violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Apparently you have not checked the link I provided in that letter to substantiate that we are not a spam source, which shows that on all other blacklists we are not listed, and substantiates that the one blacklist you are using is in error and DOES have mistakes in it. Apparently from this message to me you think that we are a spam source and will not do anything to allow us to communicate with *****@thirdplanet.net Am I right in these assumptions? If my asssumptions are right, then why do you think we are a spam source? Think about it and honestly tell why we are not sending legitimate email. Be accurate in your assessment, don't just arbitrarily say "Because osirusoft says so". Show me where our IP address is implicated in sending spam. Check out spews and osirusoft. Explicit use of their database will guarantee that you will block legitimate email. You need a way to compensate for spews and osirusoft shortcomings. Thank you in advance for your response, Bruce Armstrong bruce@onthemoney.com === Spam example === === http://groups.google.com/groups?q=onthemoney&meta=group%3Dnews.admin.net-abuse.sightings === From: "Liz [Witthuhn] Fahy" Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.sightings Subject: [email] ADV: Tired of losing money in the market? Followup-To: news.admin.net-abuse.email Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 15:21:29 +0000 (UTC) Organization: VeriMod () Lines: 63 Approved: nanas-sub@cybernothing.org Message-ID: <1478793248.20030220070611@sprintmail.com> Reply-To: "Liz [Witthuhn] Fahy" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: victor.killfile.org 1045754489 2351 216.43.25.138 (20 Feb 2003 15:21:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@killfile.org X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Processed-By: Bob the NANAS ModBot X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP news.admin.net-abuse.sightings iD8DBQE+VPJ4v1i8LqUfqQURAmdIAJ9RuuAJN/5ftQuT9klOWaXxOq/AsACfdvrl wumrzzThR6qFDvbZxnEsX80= =F6O5 X-Group-Homepage: X-Mail-Path: root@unagi.cybernothing.org!fed1mtao06.cox.net![68.6.51.7]!bhiq0001@sneakemail.com X-Modbot: Bob the NANAS ModBot X-Original-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 07:06:11 -0800 X-Original-To: NANAS X-Submissions-To: nanas-sub@cybernothing.org Status: U Return-Path: Received: from monkey.sneakemail.com ([207.106.87.13]) by eagle (EarthLink SMTP Server) with SMTP id 18LR6A1iZ3NZFji0 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 05:51:15 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 9102 invoked by uid 501); 20 Feb 2003 13:51:15 -0000 Received: from www.ashleyoviatt.com (HELO voiceisheard.com) (208.186.155.121) by mail.sneakemail.com with SMTP; 20 Feb 2003 13:51:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 2939 invoked by uid 0); 20 Feb 2003 02:26:36 -0000 Date: 20 Feb 2003 02:26:36 -0000 Message-ID: <20030220022636.2938.qmail@voiceisheard.com> To: x Subject: ADV: Tired of losing money in the market? Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Info info-at-voiceisheard.com |alt.coffee/1.0-Allow|" Reply-To: "info-at-voiceisheard.com |alt.coffee/1.0-Allow|" X-Priority: 1 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: voiceisheard.com X-Sneakemail-Label: alt.coffee X-Sneakemail-Address: x X-Sneakemail-Rcpt: x X-Sneakemail-Keyword: 1.0-Allow X-Sneakemail-Return-Path: root@voiceisheard.com X-Sneakemail-From: Info X-Sneakemail-Is-Sneakemail: yes X-Sneakemail-Folder-Path: Desktop/Usenet OnTheMoney - 60 Days Free "OnTheMoney" investors pocket gains of 30% -- 50% -- 100% -- and more.

I've been getting it and it's fantastic...

So... I've arranged for you to get the "OnTheMoney" daily investment newsletter for 60 days RISK-FREE!

And even better, they'll give you Dennis Slothower's special report — "How to Make Money in Up or Down Markets" — FREE OF CHARGE! No obligation. Just click here...





PS. This is NOT SPAM. Your privacy is very important to us. You opted-in to receive this.
As a subscriber to our affiliate's email list, you asked to receive special offers from their affiliates.

To unsubscribe from this investor offer list, just click here and you will be removed without charge. Thank you. -- All postings to news.admin.net-abuse.sightings are unconfirmed and unverified unless stated otherwise by the moderators. All opinions expressed above are considered the opinions of the original poster, not the moderators or their respective employers. For a copy of the guidelines to this group, see: === More followups from Alpine Capital === Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newspeer.monmouth.com!news-out.visi.com !petbe.visi.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "John Salyers" Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email References: Subject: Re: Spews S2638 Cartooney[ mail.com now involved Paging Suresh] Lines: 104 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 20:28:33 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.206.38.8 X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1054340790 216.206.38.8 (Fri, 30 May 2003 19:26:30 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 19:26:30 CDT Xref: uni-berlin.de news.admin.net-abuse.email:1998135 "Morely 'spam is theft' Dotes" wrote in message news:Xns938B95AA08DA1MorelyDotesspamblock@216.99.211.247... > "John Salyers" wrote in > news:afPBa.182$lY5.104514@news.uswest.net: > > > > > You said it. Here is his response to my whitelisting options. > > > > Apparently you do not have the ability to whitelist a non-spam source, > > like www.onthemoney.com (128.121.117.114). You may be the only ISP I > > have talked with that can provide ability for legitimate email > > sources. > < > [obnoxious rant nipped] > > > > Bruce Armstrong > > bruce@onthemoney.com > > Please inform Bruce Armstrong that his domains are now blocked by name at > spamblocked.com, and if he doesn't like it, he's welcome to send me snail > mail with an offer to defray the expenses of accepting email from him and > his domains. > > Until such time as he's willing to pay me and enter into an explicit > contract, he has no *right* to email me or my customers. Period. Will do Morely! Here is the latest. Is Suresh still around? Received: from SMTP32-FWD by cros.net (SMTP32) id A00000E10; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:01:02 -0400 Received: from smtp2.cros.net [216.206.238.46] by cros.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.15) id A2AE7CA02AE; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:01:02 -0400 Received: from localhost (smtp2.cros.net [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.cros.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB6B542F2 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:05:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spf1.us.outblaze.com (205-158-62-158.outblaze.com [205.158.62.158]) by smtp2.cros.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 3E298542E9 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:05:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 13130 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 23:03:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (205.158.62.68) by spf1.us.outblaze.com with QMQP; 30 May 2003 23:03:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 56487 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 23:03:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com) (205.158.62.59) by 205-158-62-153.outblaze.com with SMTP; 30 May 2003 23:03:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 44191 invoked by uid 1001); 30 May 2003 23:03:08 -0000 Message-ID: <20030530230308.44190.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [204.250.211.105] by ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com with http for otmsupport@mail.com; Fri, 30 May 2003 18:03:08 -0500 From: "Bruce Armstrong" To: northcoast@thirdplanet.net Cc: postmaster@cros.net Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 18:03:08 -0500 Subject: Missing OnTheMoney Email Updates X-Originating-Ip: 204.250.211.105 X-Originating-Server: ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020300 Status: U X-UIDL: 345154681 [My customer], If you have been following the dialogue I have had with your ISP you will note that progress cannot be made. So far, they are the only ISP that has refused to make corrections to allow our email update to reach an affected subscriber. You can still log on to our website to obtain the daily OnTheMoney Update and BUY/SELL recommendations. As to remaining with thirdplanet.net, that is up to you. If it were me I would surely discontinue the service simply because they have not been responsive to a reasonable request on behalf of their own customer. I will no longer be communicating with your ISP to try and restore our email service to your email address. If you have another email address that you would like us to use please notify me. You are encouraged to contact thirdplanet.net and/or cros.net and discuss this with them. Let me know what you accomplish or fail to accomplish. Sorry, I tried. Bruce Armstrong Vice President, Alpine Capital Publishing bruce@onthemoney.com 800-772-5789 -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup === And more of their's === Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!news-ou From: "John Salyers" Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email References: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 20:32:21 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.206.38.8 X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1054341017 216.206.38.8 (Fri, 30 May 2003 19:30:17 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 19:30:17 CDT Xref: uni-berlin.de news.admin.net-abuse.email:1998137 And the beat goes on. Received: from SMTP32-FWD by cros.net (SMTP32) id A00001030; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:39:29 -0400 Received: from smtp2.cros.net [216.206.238.46] by cros.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.15) id ABB11F202CA; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:39:29 -0400 Received: from localhost (smtp2.cros.net [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.cros.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C13C542EE for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:43:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spf1.us.outblaze.com (205-158-62-158.outblaze.com [205.158.62.158]) by smtp2.cros.net (Postfix) with SMTP id CF02A53D9C for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:43:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 20728 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 23:41:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (205.158.62.68) by spf1.us.outblaze.com with QMQP; 30 May 2003 23:41:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 59930 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 23:41:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com) (205.158.62.53) by 205-158-62-153.outblaze.com with SMTP; 30 May 2003 23:41:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 95682 invoked by uid 1001); 30 May 2003 23:41:42 -0000 Message-ID: <20030530234142.95681.qmail@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [204.250.211.105] by ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com with http for otmsupport@mail.com; Fri, 30 May 2003 18:41:41 -0500 From: "Bruce Armstrong" To: *****@thirdplanet.net Cc: postmaster@cros.net Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 18:41:41 -0500 Subject: Missing OnTheMoney Updates X-Originating-Ip: 204.250.211.105 X-Originating-Server: ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020300 Status: U X-UIDL: 345154697 [My customer], You might find this article on spam and email blocking interesting. http://www.eff.org/Spam_cybersquatting_abuse/Spam/position_on_junk_email.htm l bruce@onthemoney.com -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup === Not a lawyer's analysis of the cartooney === Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu !postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: takarov2003@yahoo.com (Jonathan Tree) Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email Subject: Re: Spews S2638 Cartooney Date: 30 May 2003 14:36:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 43 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.234.71.22 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1054330590 5879 127.0.0.1 (30 May 2003 21:36:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 May 2003 21:36:30 GMT Xref: uni-berlin.de news.admin.net-abuse.email:1998038 "Elector" wrote in message news:... > "John Salyers" wrote in message > news:uXMBa.23$eP3.35526@news.uswest.net... > > > > There is an even bigger issue with the fact that, as a provider of > > electronic communication, you are likely in violation of a Federal > > Communications Act (Federal legislation known as the Electronic > > Communications Privacy Act of 1996, as codified in 18 USC 2701(a)(2), > > forbids anyone to intentionally exceed an authorization to access stored > > electronic communications, thereby preventing authorized access of a user to > > a communication of or intended for that user.) > > > Your bull shit about the Federal Communications Act reminds me of the > spammers that use that "Under Bill ?? Section 301 passed by the US > Congress..Yada yada yada" There is NO BILL that can be enforced it would > have to be a LAW. Actually, he did refer to an enforceable code <18 USC 2701(a)(2)>, but is apparently mis-interpreting the circumstances under which he is attempting to apply it. IANAL, but if use of SPEWS stops the transmission before it is stored on the target mail server, the section quoted does not seem to apply as it does not "obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication ->while it is in electronic storage in such system<- " If the message is rejected before it is received on the target system, is never stored there, and thus the use of SPEWS for email blocking in no way interferes with the ability of the intended recipient to go to the site ->where it is stored<- and view the information there. > And it would not apply outside the USA unless there are > collateral rights with other host countries. True. === And another NAL one === Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed!dfw-peer!news.verio.net !ord-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email Subject: Re: Spews S2638 Cartooney References: Organization: Not Much X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test69 (20 September 1998) From: bonomi@c-ns. (Robert Bonomi) Lines: 92 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 23:22:49 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.241.52.60 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: ord-read.news.verio.net 1054336969 207.241.52.60 (Fri, 30 May 2003 23:22:49 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 23:22:49 GMT Xref: uni-berlin.de news.admin.net-abuse.email:1998095 In article , Jonathan Tree wrote: >"Elector" wrote in message >news:... >> "John Salyers" wrote in message >> news:uXMBa.23$eP3.35526@news.uswest.net... >> > >> > There is an even bigger issue with the fact that, as a provider of >> > electronic communication, you are likely in violation of a Federal >> > Communications Act (Federal legislation known as the Electronic >> > Communications Privacy Act of 1996, as codified in 18 USC 2701(a)(2), >> > forbids anyone to intentionally exceed an authorization to access stored >> > electronic communications, thereby preventing authorized access of a user to >> > a communication of or intended for that user.) >> > > > > >> Your bull shit about the Federal Communications Act reminds me of the >> spammers that use that "Under Bill ?? Section 301 passed by the US >> Congress..Yada yada yada" There is NO BILL that can be enforced it would >> have to be a LAW. > >Actually, he did refer to an enforceable code <18 USC 2701(a)(2)>, but >is apparently mis-interpreting the circumstances under which he is >attempting to apply it. *totally* mis-interpreting it. and you are falling for it, too. :) > >IANAL, but if use of SPEWS stops the transmission before it is stored >on the target mail server, the section quoted does not seem to apply >as it does not > > "obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or >electronic > communication ->while it is in electronic storage in such system<- >" > >If the message is rejected before it is received on the target system, >is never stored there, and thus the use of SPEWS for email blocking in >no way interferes with the ability of the intended recipient to go to >the site ->where it is stored<- and view the information there. Acutally the 'operational part' of 18 USC 2701 (a) is the part _before_ what you quoted. to wit: "(a) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section whoever - \\ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>----------|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| // (1) intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided; or (2) intentionally exceeds an authorization to access that facility; and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to...." The highlighted part at the beginning of subsection (a) is of critical importance, because subsection (c) says : (c) Exceptions. - Subsection (a) of this section does not apply with respect to conduct authorized - (1) by the person or entity providing a wire or electronic communications service; (2) by a user of that service with respect to a communication of or intended for that user The use of a blocklist to inhibit messages from specified ranges of IP addresses is _clearly_ "conduct authorized by the person or entity providing a wire or electronic communications service" Thus, 2701 (a) (2) is *entirely*irrelevant* to the _policies_, and implemen- tation thereof, of the service provider. Or *any* activities of the employees thereof, as long as they are acting _within_ the scope of their assigned duties. Therefore, despite the "plausible-looking language" of the original letter, it *is* totally a "cartooney". Not to mention the blanket immunity from liability conferred by 47 USC 230, which having been enacted more recently than 18 USC 2701, takes precedence over 18 USC 2701. In point of legal fact, the letter skirts *dangerously* close to being A criminal act in and of itself.