Subject: ACC to kill off Toronto's oldest ISP

From: [email-masked] (Golan Klinger)
Date: 29 Dec 1996 22:14:27 GMT

Hello again,

	Since my last excerpt from the "private" [email-masked] mailing
list was so well received and because ACK won't admit they are going to kill
off Internex, I thought I would bring you more! Yes, the words you are going
to read are from Mark Morais ([email-masked]) who is the head of tech support
for Internet Canada in Toronto. Once you read this, you'll know FOR SURE
that ACK is about to pull the plug...

Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 14:35:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Morais <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [SUPPORT-L] IO payments

Hi All,

The powers that be have decided that accounts that go negative on IO will 
no longer be unlocked and the people will be transferred to customer 
service and be turned over for an ICAN.NET account.  IO will also no 
longer be accepting additional payments for accounts as they want as 
little money as possible in the IO system when people are sold their ACC 
id's.

From the system side we will make it as unobtrusive as possible by 
forwarding IO email to their new ican.net account for at least 6 months.  
This should give plenty of time for friends/relatives/customers etc., to 
learn the new email address.  We will also keep the web machine going for 
a while to redirect web pages (something we didn't do for Ulix or 
Terraport) for probably about 3 months to give people the chance to 
advertise the new location.

Hang on everyone, it's gonna be a crazy month.

Mark
--

	A crazy monthg? He ain't seen nothing yet. We're a tenacious
bunch and we never forget. Have email, will annoy. Now, more from Mark!

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 18:37:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Morais <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [SUPPORT-L] IO payments made last week.

Hey all,

A huge list of people who made IO payments before we stopped accepting 
them and those that have come in the mail have been given to Owen 
Gilbert.  Trouble is, it's not his job to call them, that was given to 
someone else.  We'll be dealing with these on Monday but we've made sure 
that everyone on the lists that paid will not be locked out.  Those that 
were low we configred to expire on Monday or Teusday and there's a note 
in the persons file saying "account reconfigured until payment processed" 
or something like that.  They will then be called on Monday.

If anyone calls please tell them that their payment is not lost and 
someone wil be contacting them.  Until that time their accounts should be 
OK.  If there's any exceptions please let me know as we don't want anyone 
to go without service.

As a side note, I've had Chris put back the ulock program on gadmin so 
everyone can unlock an IO account for the day.  This is for people who 
sign up for ACC and need to get at their email one last time and move 
their files etc.  Don't unlock a persons account more than once and 
advise them that they have until midnight to clear their things or it 
will lock out again.

Mark
--

	Well, there it is. IO is dead, ACC/ICan killed it and they're
too cowardly to admit it. Pissed off? Of course you are! I suggest you
send email to:

Steve Dubnik <[email-masked]>    (president of ACC)
Maggs Barrett <[email-masked]> (vice-President of ACC)
Dan Hawes <[email-masked]>      (head of "ACC NetMedia")
Paul Barrett <[email-masked]>   (head of "ACC Internet")
Chris Mason <[email-masked]>     (boy detective)
Mark Morais <[email-masked]>      (tech support manager)

	Or you can call around to complain, try:

ACC Long Distance Inc. @ 5343 Dundas West    Vox    (416) 236-3636
					     Fax    (416) 236-4749

	Remember kids, call them, call often. Tell them what you REALLY
think. Call your friends, call your relatives, your business associates
and their associates. Tell them all that ACC/Internet Canada screwed
you over and gave you shitty service. If you have ACC phone service,
cancel it and make sure they know why you're cancelling it. Make a big
stink and let these money-grubbing companies know that you can't fuck
people over and expect nobody to do anything.

	Welcome to the Internet, ACC. Information will be free.

-- 
Golan Klinger [[email-masked]]     For long you live and high you fly
                                  And smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry
Good, fast or cheap.              And all you touch and all you see
Pick two...                       Is all your life will ever be

---

From: [email-masked] (Keith Medcalf)
Date: 31 Dec 1996 08:33:37 GMT

In <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Brian Tao) writes:
>In article <[email-masked]>, Keith Medcalf <[email-masked]> wrote:

>> In short, Internex is not going to disappear very quickly, no matter
>> how much ACC or ICAN wish it would.

>    What happens if the company with whom the contract/agreement was
>reached no longer exists?  Does Internex Online still legally exist as
>a corporate entity, after it was folded into Internet Canada, and then
>subsequently bought by ACC from Greenlight?  Would this depend on the
>terms of the purchase between ACC and Greenlight?

No.

There were contracts between Internex Online and its customers which
were assumed lock-stock-and-barrel by ICAN/Greenlight when they
purchased Internex Online (unless of course, the individual contracts
between Internex and its customers allowed those terms to be modified
without notice by Internex Online, and my agreement certainly did not
allow that, so probably most customers did not either).

So, we have a certain set of obligations of Internex Online to its
customers.  Those obligations where assumed by ICAN/Greenlight and would
continue until such time as Internex's customers decided they did not
either because the contract expired by whatever fashion the contract was
deemed to expire (as I recall it, this only happened when an account ran
out of money to pay the accruing charges, or if Internex decided to
terminate an account for cause -- breach of AUP, etc) or the customer
chose to terminate the contract.  I do not believe there was any
provision for the arbitrary termination of the contract by Internex
Online.

So, these obligations became obligations of ICAN/Greenlight when it
purchased Internex Online.  This is required by contract law unless all
the affected customers were also a party to or waived the assumption of
these obligations by ICAN/Greenlight.  (I was not a party to the
purchase agreement, nor did I waiver any contract terms I had with
Internex Online).  This is called an assignment.  When ICAN/Greenlight
purchased Internex, not only did they purchase its assets, but they also
assumed its obligations as well, both fiscal and to its customers.

For Internex Online customers still operating under original Internex
Online terms (or under revised terms, whatever that may be), will also
have those same rights, obligations and assets transferred to ACC when
it purchased the company.

Corollory:

This is why, for example, when you purchase a house which has tenants in
it, and you want vacant possession, you must covenant with the seller
_and_ the tennant to provide that vacant possession.  In fact, it is
usually made a CONDITION OF SALE, and the sale is not completed unless
vacant possession is obtained PRIOR to the signing date.

The tenant is under no obligation whatsoever to yield possession to the
purchaser. The purchaser becomes obligated to the tenant and the tenant
to the purchaser in the same terms as the tenant was to the seller,
unless the tenant agrees otherwise.

In this case, the purchaser will _always_ require the tenant to be a
party to the sale or to contract directly between the tenant and the
purchaser, because if he does not, the tenant is under no obligation to
vacate the premise, even if he had agreed separately with the seller to
do so.

Under contract law, as long as the purchaser continues the purchase,
ever though the conditions of sale are not satisfied, the purchaser is
assumed to have accepted the obligations and waived the conditions.

Summary:

In other words, ACC can absorb the Internex customer base by having
Internex Online customers CHOOSE to modify their contracts, or can allow
ATTRITION of that customer base by normal means (ie, let the contracts
expire and not offer to renew them).

On the other hand, I believe ICAN/Greenlight made statements at the time
of purchase to the effect that they would continue to honour Internex
accounts on the Internex terms and conditions.  This statement would
still be binding between any Internex customers at that time, who were
still Internex customers at the time of the sale to ACC.

That is to say that ACC is obligated to continue Internex as long as a
single customer wishes to continue on those terms, and that they may not
withdraw or discontinue in this obligation.

Of course, as Don likes to say "Don't write a cheque with your head that
your ass can't cash".  This is to say, of course, that should ACC decide
that they wish _not_ to fulfill their obligations, there is not much
that can be done about it, save court proceedings for specific
performance.

ACC will, of course, have to weigh very carefully the liklihood of legal
action if they decide to pursue such a course.  They will have to
consider it not only on the basis of whether or not it might be
successful, but more importantly, on the basis of _COST_ and of the
negative publicity that would be created.

On a cost basis alone, consider that a single individual taking the
matter into General Division at a cost of $125.00 (General Division is
the only level of court with competent jurisdiction to hear and
adjudicate matters of perogative relief -- and more so if you claim
damages of $50,000.00 or more).  It will cost ACC about $10,000.00 just
to retain counsel for the proceeding, and those costs will mount
extremely rapidly after the usual pre-emptory challenges are heard.

An single individual could easily put quite a heavy financial burden on
the company, and ten or twenty individuals, bringing individual suit,
could easily bankrupt it.

Not to mention the publicity which is bound to occur, especially if
interim proceedings enforce specific performance are successful.

Of course, the individuals will also have to face the risk that they
might lose, and have to pay the costs of ACC in defending the suit.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Medcalf      (416) 410-5791      http://www.dessus.com/
IBM OS/2, LAN Server, DB2/2, TCP/IP, DOS, Windows, Windows NT
IBM System Management Software Specialist  IBM BESTeam Member
          IBM OS/2 Warp Server Software Specialist
Finger or email [email-masked] for my PGP Public Key