Court letter

[Hannibalector]

OMG lol You think the money grap by nfps is news, what about all the undelivered "Wildthing"s. And you know what? Yes letters, and more than letters followed. In fact, rumors were that (I think his name was Norris) a security investigator for Dave, would virtually kidnap suspected pirates and fly them to foreign soil to "get them to talk" (sound familiar lol). It has been a while, but these end user letters are nothing compared to the old Dave tactics.

BTW it seems only Magi is fighting. I saw a few others where Charlie has already filed motion for clerks default. The appearance is they are VERY eager to get a default. Chad and company are almost filing to the day a response to complaint is due.

did Chad and company tell the authorities about criminal activities happening alex ? btw you should read Murdoch's Pirates and you would see John Norris also got his ass handed to him in the Mexico via videotape threatning to kidnap an individual and take him across from Mexico in the trunk of a car, thats NDS for ya

[JCO]

Norris probably got marching orders from Darth Vader ( AKA Rupert M) ..ROFLMAO

As for the default its an obvious strategy. Then you will see a mass mailing.

[Hannibalector]

theres a lot of people on the bandwagon to send donations to Nagra, you'd almost think there was a percentage in it up for grabs

[DrWhoFan]

I am by means a lawyer and I urge you to get real legal advice from a professional but I will say this: In Civil cases the burden of proof is based on probability and not reasonable doubt like criminal matters. Your defense of never using the codes or never getting them to work may not fly.
talk to a lawyer

[alex70olds]

did Chad and company tell the authorities about criminal activities happening alex ? btw you should read Murdoch's Pirates and you would see John Norris also got his ass handed to him in the Mexico via videotape threatning to kidnap an individual and take him across from Mexico in the trunk of a car, thats NDS for ya

Yes, but it happened, more than once. That is why you will never see the DTV hack in public. Makes JJ and crew out to be selling cookies door to door.

[Hannibalector]

Yes, but it happened, more than once. That is why you will never see the DTV hack in public. Makes JJ and crew out to be selling cookies door to door.

you are aware that Norris and his crew were fired recently werent you ? most of the NDS cohorts with exception of Abe Peled for Cisco now

[alex70olds]

I am by means a lawyer and I urge you to get real legal advice from a professional but I will say this: In Civil cases the burden of proof is based on probability and not reasonable doubt like criminal matters. Your defense of never using the codes or never getting them to work may not fly.
talk to a lawyer

I almost agree, but there are special provisions in Federal court for those that go Pro Se

[alex70olds]

you are aware that Norris and his crew were fired recently werent you ? most of the NDS cohorts with exception of Abe Peled for Cisco now

hehe They did their job too well.

[Hannibalector]

hehe They did their job too well.

if you mean by there job to intimadate pirates to there side to screw over there competitors then sure, they did a great job, I'm amazed none of them are in jail

[alex70olds]

if you mean by there job to intimadate pirates to there side to screw over there competitors then sure, they did a great job, I'm amazed none of them are in jail

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Much more fun to have a worthy adversary.

[Nostradamus]

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Much more fun to have a worthy adversary.

something you don't have with Hanni :)

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

lawyers are NOT necessary for small claims,,, besides their worse than DN
"money grubbing sharks",,,and anyways most lawyers one would hire
would know squat how to defend this ,,,all they would end up doing is telling peeeps to try and settle
so the ONLY good they would be would be to negotiate terms and even then your way
better off negotiating by yourself save loads of $$$


btw,,on the DA endusers,,,the ONLY reason got thieir asses is the paper trail
found on DA's premises,,,it was TOO late for him to destroy and this gave Nag
all the neccessary personal info on each of them to go after

this is MUCH different,,,they are alleging you bought a code and there,,that is all that they need???
come on man,,,sheesh seams you are not going to agree with one iota
no worries,,,i have MY beliefs,,,we shall see

almost forgot,
what if i bought the code for my roomate, and I have NO clue about this stuff?? there are so many
arguments that makes sense ,,,and THAT is why i say, you need to have
all your ducks in a row to PROVE your claim,,, it bears repeating
they have SQUAT all they have is a code, geez might as well shut er down boys,,,
its all over

oh and, what if i bought the code and intended to use it with
wuff telling roomate it would fine to improve FTA channels?? BUT
by the time the donation was complete roomate's receiver
went caput,,,so now your left with INTENT and youll argue with me now that
this (intent) is enough to make their case?? LOL cuz reality check
all they have is

speculations, suspiscions, assumptions, and last but not least, intentions

wow i sure wish it was THAT easy, i would like to take a few peeps to small claims
/civil proceeding s if i thought i could get away with such flimsy evidence,,too funny


I said I did not agree that they had to prove you altered the receiver. I am not sure that they need more evidence because there is only one use for the codes and there is only one purpose for that server. That is a problem. But I believe they might have more and if they don't they will try to get more. If your really smart and covered all your bases than that might not be possible but sometimes people don't antipate what they might do. I don't think anyone saw coming that they would go to your neighbors for evidence.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

beautifull thing in the 2 tier justice system isn't it ? instead of proving yourself in a case of reasonable doubt (criminal) all you now need is tipping the scale (civil) look away joe publc while we take matters into our hands and all we need to do is to tip the scale.

might as well do away with the criminal system alltogether



I am ok with that because if I file a civil action I am not in the same position as the police for gathering evidence. Someday if your ever a Plaintiff suing someone and you know your right but you don't have all the evidence you'll be content that you can win if it looks like the preponderance of the evidence you had tip the scales in your favor.




GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Why wait until you're negotiating down from $10,000 instead of negotiating down from $3,500 ?

How would that save you loads of $$$$ ?

Do you think they will be more forgiving, after you forced them to incur even more expenses ?

If your intent, is to jerk them around and make them spend more, why not start negotiating when you received the first letter. At least

then, if you go to court, you can show that you attempted to come to an agreement. That's one of the first questions the judge will

consider ... have the parties attempted to resolve the issue ? So, if they summarily refused to negotiate with you, it could act in your

favor.

Believe it or not, (other than Small Claims Court) the entire legal system, frowns on self representation, it slows down proceedings

and in the end, winds up costing everyone more. You may find, you would be better off using your skills to negotiate with your

accusers prior to them filing.

Now if you're intent on walking into court and pleading ignorance. My roommate did it ? My dog pissed on my IRD so I couldn't have

used the code even if I wanted to ... or I didn't know what I was buying. Then I wish you luck, because I think you're going to need it.

I could be wrong, but I don't think they want you to settle. :)

If you settle, they can't publish it. They want and need the publicity, associated with their war on piracy. I think it's of more value, to

them, than the $3500.



In some small claims courts like in Quebec they don't allow lawyers. You represent yourself as well as the other party. Its like Judge Judy lol.


In other courts higher than small claims in some jurisdictions a Corporation must have a lawyer but you can represent yourself as an individual if sued.




GS2

[fifties]

I am by means a lawyer
Good, we have a JD grad among us.

How about considering a hypothetical situation?

You are sitting on the bench in Civil Court to decide a case wherein;

DN as the plaintiff provides their evidence, consisting solely of proof of the purchase of a code to connect to an IKS server. They allege that the defendant has a pirate satellite receiver, and has used the code to steal their product. They furthermore contend that the code can serve no other useful purpose.

The defendant end-user uses as his defense, testimony that he doesn't own a satellite receiver, and therefore never used the code. He also brings up the fact that the plaintiff can show no actual proof that he ever connected to the IKS server.

How would you rule?

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

cloning it is even bigger...lol


No proof is available. You should know better than that to say its broken.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

where do you see any of this as a private matter ? when clearly an alleged breach of criminal code matters has taken place with regards to criminal laws on the books, RCA, DMCA, if the allegation exists that criminal activity is taking place and costing consumers more, then that is against society is it not ? oh wait tipping the scales is really what this is about and there private right to do so, tipping scales versus reasonable doubt, how many end user cases have been offered up and given over to the criminal system ?

seems to me if Nagra has enough evidence of people breaking the law and have done nothing to report them they themsleves aren't being forthcoming now are they kutter, not being very good citizens are they ?



The DMCA is both a Criminal and Civil statue. The RCA under section 18 has provision for right of Civil action. The allegation is made under Civil because the law allows for either one. Not sure what it is that you don't understand. A lawsuit between a provider and a dealer or end user is not against society.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

my grip on reality as usual is far more then yours is, again, I don't give a rats ass what the plaintiff has chosen to do in pursuing this themselves, what the hell is the matter with you kutter, the law has been broken criminal matter as you always like to point out and through in everyones face at every opportunity you get, why has Nagra not turned evidence over to the authorities for them to conduct what they need to in a criminal matter, why are you giving them the right to turn a blind eye to the law and not reporting it ?

oh and more racketeering then extortion then anything else is really how it looks


Huh. You really don't understand Civil. Do you know how often it is you go to authorities and tell them what happen with your evidence and they tell you to go file a lawsuit.


In all likelhood if they went to authorities with these end user lawsuits authorities well tell them to pursue it civilly. Do you understand the requirement for proof for criminal is much higher than civil. You might have a case for fraud but it might not be to prove it was criminal fraud where as it might in civil. Remeber OJ how he won in criminal and lost in civil.




GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Vista? OMG LMFAO!!!!!!!! Made my day! Friggin scammer! Lol



Famous for his pre ordering sales pitch. Hes living in Costa Rica now.



GS2

[dishuser]

Good, we have a JD grad among us.

How about considering a hypothetical situation?

You are sitting on the bench in Civil Court to decide a case wherein;

DN as the plaintiff provides their evidence, consisting solely of proof of the purchase of a code to connect to an IKS server. They allege that the defendant has a pirate satellite receiver, and has used the code to steal their product. They furthermore contend that the code can serve no other useful purpose.

The defendant end-user uses as his defense, testimony that he doesn't own a satellite receiver, and therefore never used the code. He also brings up the fact that the plaintiff can show no actual proof that he ever connected to the IKS server.

How would you rule?
sorry but IMO it's a guilty verdict
it's an illegal code used or not

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Yes, but it happened, more than once. That is why you will never see the DTV hack in public. Makes JJ and crew out to be selling cookies door to door.


A lot of people don't realise or know that their tactics are the worse that have existed by far. NDS in my opinion holds the gold award because they did their own tactics a lot of times like going through your garbage you threw out and getting Private dicks to infiltrate your business for extended periods.



GS2

[kutter]

sorry, just thought of something else,,,

part of the reasoning to wait until they (plaintifs) make their next move?

cuz many many plaintifs wont go that extra mile and eventually file,,,

the purpose of the conference is allow all parties be more aware, if you will
on what exactly is the plaintif depending on (as proof) to make their claim

if that conference causes the parties to reach some kind of settlement??
you think just b/c it was upped to 10,000 they wont hear you out?? give your head
a shake,,,and in case you didnt know, the courts make iut a RULE that this conference
take place as the last step to avoid a trial,,, everything depends on the strentgh of the claim

some have ample evidence some have SQUAT,,,thats DN,SQUAT,,, LOL

and others say its too much bother,,paper work, cost, time, and in the end
they have to weigh out the fact they may still get a judgement BUT NEVER get
a red cent in the long run,,,you have to know who your going after and weigh all
that out, NO. 1 being - how much percentage will you really see of the original
debt owed???? what makes this case unique?? is DN is NOW deciding to take
a shot in the dark, if you will, and then scaring peeps all the more by upping their
original claim,,,you really think they will prevail JUST because they upped it??

again, SCARE TACTIC = SQUAT

making them set up the original conference to
disclose EVERY single piece of evidence is the WISEST move a defendant can make
in this whole process
that is why so many of these letters
in the past got nowhere,,,did you know at least THAT much?? thought not,,cuz NOT
one peep contacted DN with this, crap when similar letters were circulated (mailed out)

they took the community by surprise here, by filing this (frivolous) claim,,,let the games begin ;)

This plaintiff has already demonstrated that they are prepared to file :)

Of course, if you can walk into court without a lawyer, and win ... it will be the cheapest method ... that doesn't mean it's the smartest thing for everyone though.

My suggestion, had nothing to with procedure or attempting to win. I'm not sure what part of that you are missing.

I suppose the thing I find disconcerting with your argument is telling people that they shouldn't seek out legal advice.

[fifties]

Originally Posted by fifties
Good, we have a JD grad among us.

How about considering a hypothetical situation?

You are sitting on the bench in Civil Court to decide a case wherein;

DN as the plaintiff provides their evidence, consisting solely of proof of the purchase of a code to connect to an IKS server. They allege that the defendant has a pirate satellite receiver, and has used the code to steal their product. They furthermore contend that the code can serve no other useful purpose.

The defendant end-user uses as his defense, testimony that he doesn't own a satellite receiver, and therefore never used the code. He also brings up the fact that the plaintiff can show no actual proof that he ever connected to the IKS server.

How would you rule?
sorry but IMO it's a guilty verdict
it's an illegal code used or not
Your opinion is always appreciated, DU, but I wanted one from someone grounded in law...His knowledge in the discipline would carry legitimate weight.

[dishuser]

A lot of people don't realise or know that their tactics are the worse that have existed by far. NDS in my opinion holds the gold award because they did their own tactics a lot of times like going through your garbage you threw out and getting Private dicks to infiltrate your business for extended periods.



GS2dish/bev did same when going after dealers in 2005
which is illegal where I live...lol

[ftaalltheway]

sorry but IMO it's a guilty verdict
it's an illegal code used or not

ok, lets look at this from another angle,,,someone pls tell me what the diffis between
connecting to a public server and a so-called private one?? your answer is NONE presumably

so then,,,why is it when dn/nag took down all these other BIG players, ie; NF (suns) dongles
etc etc. and thousands of peeps were connecting to their "public" servers (everytime they bought
the IRDs be they NF or Ilink or others) and NOT go after endusers, at THAT time???

didnt they have evidence that endusers were dllding files/bins to connect to those public servers?

isnt THAT why so many FTA sites closed shop so as to PROTECT endusers since the threat was always there
visavis these files?? since all those activities were like you say, ILEGAL?
and with ip logs nag could locate all peeps that connected, heck even records of some retailers who sold
all those FTA receivers, involved, in this piracy scheme (iks)..im sure im missing a few more details,,,point
being, they surely had a whole lot more evidence with all those take downs didnt they??so that, if one compares it to
what they are using NOW, with this fishing trip, surely they must have more, to make this claim fly, yes?

it just makes me shake my head that this would be enough, to nail a peep, just for buying a don
without supporting evidence??,,,it just doesnt make sense ESP,after all those other attempts over the yrs
with exact same letters...i read that their investigation is ongoing with maggi,,so, maybe they KNOW full well
they will need more and are hoping they will connect more dots,,,cuz something is very wrong with
this picture,,,i mean i know DN is power Hungry but man alive,,,this is outrageous,,and IM NOT
even affected in any way shape or form,,,but it (stuff like this) adds to my already worked-up disdain
I have held against these corp FAT cats for many yrs who think they OWN us (vewing choices)
,,,hence why im glad for this
so-called hobby,,and i know im not alone when i say,,,SCREW em ;) i wouldnt pay for a sub
with them or any other now that i can enjoy FREETV...thats right trolls,,,wouldnt you
just like to drag MY ass in court?? i know you know that i know youve wanted MY ass
ever since ive been egging
you jerks for yrs now,,,anyways, nough said,,, time to await the outcome.......................................

[dishuser]

public servers?
so guy walks into say wintronics and pays cash
how do you sue mr cash?
ok, lets look at this from another angle,,,someone pls tell me what the diffis between
connecting to a public server and a so-called private one?? your answer is NONE presumably

so then,,,why is it when dn/nag took down all these other BIG players, ie; NF (suns) dongles
etc etc. and thousands of peeps were connecting to their "public" servers (everytime they bought
the IRDs be they NF or Ilink or others) and NOT go after endusers, at THAT time???

didnt they have evidence that endusers were dllding files/bins to connect to those public servers?

isnt THAT why so many FTA sites closed shop so as to PROTECT endusers since the threat was always there
visavis these files?? since all those activities were like you say, ILEGAL?
and with ip logs nag could locate all peeps that connected, heck even records of some retailers who sold
all those FTA receivers, involved, in this piracy scheme (iks)..im sure im missing a few more details,,,point
being, they surely had a whole lot more evidence with all those take downs didnt they??so that, if one compares it to
what they are using NOW, with this fishing trip, surely they must have more, to make this claim fly, yes?

it just makes me shake my head that this would be enough, to nail a peep, just for buying a don
without supporting evidence??,,,it just doesnt make sense ESP,after all those other attempts over the yrs
with exact same letters...i read that their investigation is ongoing with maggi,,so, maybe they KNOW full well
they will need more and are hoping they will connect more dots,,,cuz something is very wrong with
this picture,,,i mean i know DN is power Hungry but man alive,,,this is outrageous,,and IM NOT
even affected in any way shape or form,,,but it (stuff like this) adds to my already worked-up disdain
I have held against these corp FAT cats for many yrs who think they OWN us (vewing choices)
,,,hence why im glad for this
so-called hobby,,and i know im not alone when i say,,,SCREW em ;) i wouldnt pay for a sub
with them or any other now that i can enjoy FREETV...thats right trolls,,,wouldnt you
just like to drag MY ass in court?? i know you know that i know youve wanted MY ass
ever since ive been egging
you jerks for yrs now,,,anyways, nough said,,, time to await the outcome.......................................

[ftaalltheway]

public servers?
so guy walks into say wintronics and pays cash
how do you sue mr cash?

im not suggesting by any means that would be by itself, enough
just a small example of a corroberation to all the other evidence
that so many peeps were so afraid of, all these past yrs

btw - many peeps bought online thus leaving paper trails
thats why so many retailers sold IRDs,,,NO WAIT,, i meant, SPR's
"satelite piracy receivers" LOL
online cuz with their shipping deals
made it an easy decision for many thousands of peeps esp since ONLY select
retailers sold exclusive,,,ahhhhhh it is all so interesting,,,

no doubt whoever thought about this scheme of nailing peeps for simply buying codes
and eventually a judge buys it (the claim)?? then he/she is surely in line for a HUGE promotion

LOL

[alex70olds]

public servers?
so guy walks into say wintronics and pays cash
how do you sue mr cash?

Uh? errrr. cough lmao!


In 1965, Johnny’s truck caught fire due to an overheated wheel bearing, which triggered the forest fire in Los Padres National Forest in California.

When a judge asked him why he did it, he said “I didn’t do it, my truck did, and it’s dead, so you can’t question it.” When the damage was accounted for, Cash was pressed with all of it, especially the killing of the condors, but he was unrepentant in refusing blame, saying “I don’t care about your damn yellow buzzards.”

Cash was sued by the government for what would be $900,000 today, but settled for closer to $642,000 in today’s values. Eventually, Johnny Cash recanted his outlaw image, and later in his life converted to Christianity. He died back in 2003.

[dishuser]

im not suggesting by any means that would be by itself, enough
just a small example of a corroberation to all the other evidence
that so many peeps were so afraid of, all these past yrs

btw - many peeps bought online thus leaving paper trails
thats why so many retailers sold IRDs,,,NO WAIT,, i meant, SPR's
"satelite piracy receivers" LOL
online cuz with their shipping deals
made it an easy decision for many thousands of peeps esp since ONLY select
retailers sold exclusive,,,ahhhhhh it is all so interesting,,,

no doubt whoever thought about this scheme of nailing peeps for simply buying codes
and eventually a judge buys it (the claim)?? then he/she is surely in line for a HUGE promotion

LOL
so let's say online
to a Mr.Dishuser COD?
hmmmm

[ftaalltheway]

so let's say online
to a Mr.Dishuser COD?
hmmmm

ok ok, im not in the mood to dance with you anymore,,,cuz youll
step on my toes no matter how well i dance so, time to call it a day,, mean bastord lol

[Hannibalector]

easier to get a monetary settlement in civil...reality check

thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.

[dishuser]

thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.
duty?ya right

[Peachseed]

How many of you guys work for Gee...The more I read the more I wonder...lol...

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.


There must be thousands or tens of thousands of lawyers who never report to authorities about the civil lawsuits they file. Perhaps even though they studied law for years they must have not completed the section that deals with their obligations to report Civil allegations to the authorities.




GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

ok, lets look at this from another angle,,,someone pls tell me what the diffis between
connecting to a public server and a so-called private one?? your answer is NONE presumably

so then,,,why is it when dn/nag took down all these other BIG players, ie; NF (suns) dongles
etc etc. and thousands of peeps were connecting to their "public" servers (everytime they bought
the IRDs be they NF or Ilink or others) and NOT go after endusers, at THAT time???

didnt they have evidence that endusers were dllding files/bins to connect to those public servers?

isnt THAT why so many FTA sites closed shop so as to PROTECT endusers since the threat was always there
visavis these files?? since all those activities were like you say, ILEGAL?
and with ip logs nag could locate all peeps that connected, heck even records of some retailers who sold
all those FTA receivers, involved, in this piracy scheme (iks)..im sure im missing a few more details,,,point
being, they surely had a whole lot more evidence with all those take downs didnt they??so that, if one compares it to
what they are using NOW, with this fishing trip, surely they must have more, to make this claim fly, yes?

it just makes me shake my head that this would be enough, to nail a peep, just for buying a don
without supporting evidence??,,,it just doesnt make sense ESP,after all those other attempts over the yrs
with exact same letters...i read that their investigation is ongoing with maggi,,so, maybe they KNOW full well
they will need more and are hoping they will connect more dots,,,cuz something is very wrong with
this picture,,,i mean i know DN is power Hungry but man alive,,,this is outrageous,,and IM NOT
even affected in any way shape or form,,,but it (stuff like this) adds to my already worked-up disdain
I have held against these corp FAT cats for many yrs who think they OWN us (vewing choices)
,,,hence why im glad for this
so-called hobby,,and i know im not alone when i say,,,SCREW em ;) i wouldnt pay for a sub
with them or any other now that i can enjoy FREETV...thats right trolls,,,wouldnt you
just like to drag MY ass in court?? i know you know that i know youve wanted MY ass
ever since ive been egging
you jerks for yrs now,,,anyways, nough said,,, time to await the outcome.......................................



Maybe they didn't have the evidence. Maybe they don't intend to go after thousands and thousands of end users. Maybe its just too time consumming and not pratical.


In some major cases the court ruled that they could not go after end users when they got the information on end users. The defendants fought the releasing of that information and the court agreed to have it released but at the same time said they could not use the information to go after those end users.




GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

In some major cases the court ruled that they could not go after end users when they got the information on end users. The defendants fought the releasing of that information and the court agreed to have it released but at the same time said they could not use the information to go after those end users.


That also goes to Hanni's contention that they have to go to authorities when filling lawsuits as here you even have courts saying the evidence being released on end users can't be used to futher pursue civil litigation against them never mind criminal.




GS2

[ftaalltheway]

Maybe they didn't have the evidence. Maybe they don't intend to go after thousands and thousands of end users. Maybe its just too time consumming and not pratical.


In some major cases the court ruled that they could not go after end users when they got the information on end users. The defendants fought the releasing of that information and the court agreed to have it released but at the same time said they could not use the information to go after those end users.




GS2

the dikens you say? then that is "cherry picking" at its finest,,, ;)

[ret2012]

How many of you guys work for Gee...The more I read the more I wonder...lol...
at least 3 that i know off lol.

[dishuser]

at least 3 that i know off lol.

off?
off what?

[kutter]

thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.

have you done your duty ? :tehe:

now you want everyone to report evidence of theft ... or are you only referring to corporations :)

[henpecked]

Well, start the ball rolling..make contact over at Satscams site
or maybe you have already




thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.

[Hannibalector]

Well, start the ball rolling..make contact over at Satscams site
or maybe you have already

you havn't been reading what I've been writing have you ? I question there motives and tactics like everyone else should

[henpecked]

you havn't been reading what I've been writing have you ? I question there motives and tactics like everyone else should

Pls explain this...regardless of what you posted before...I'm only interested in this quote


Originally Posted by Hannibalector

thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.

[Nostradamus]

Pls explain this...regardless of what you posted before...I'm only interested in this quote

what is there to explain? the whole judicial system revolves around somebody ratting on somebody. did you know they even have anonymous hotlines where you can phone in and rat somebody out for money? It all depends on the persons morals and interpretations. If you have no problem with your next door neighbor running a meth lab you don't worry about it. Exactly the same as a cop pulling you over for speeding and letting you off with a warning because you were only 5mph over the limit

[velocity9421]

now there's an idea

lets make signs that say: Will Rat on people for codes :)


what is there to explain? the whole judicial system revolves around somebody ratting on somebody. did you know they even have anonymous hotlines where you can phone in and rat somebody out for money? It all depends on the persons morals and interpretations. If you have no problem with your next door neighbor running a meth lab you don't worry about it. Exactly the same as a cop pulling you over for speeding and letting you off with a warning because you were only 5mph over the limit

[fifties]

Exactly the same as a cop pulling you over for speeding and letting you off with a warning because you were only 5mph over the limit
OK, so perhaps a limit could be initiated for DN stoolies.

How about;

1 - 10 channels pilfered, they look the other way,

10 - 20, they get a warning,

20 or more, they get ratted out?

Special provision for bagging 5 or more HD'S, or more than one PPV per week.

:)

[surfinisfun]

OK, so perhaps a limit could be initiated for DN stoolies.

How about;

1 - 10 channels pilfered, they look the other way,

10 - 20, they get a warning,

20 or more, they get ratted out?

Special provision for bagging 5 or more HD'S, or more than one PPV per week.

:)

Thats funny man, make it so.

Could someone tell dick we've settled on that.lmfao

[kutter]

Well, start the ball rolling..make contact over at Satscams site
or maybe you have already

for the record I was just screwing around with Hanni, anyone that can read, knows how he feels about the providers and large corporations in general :)

[henpecked]

Well, any drug dealing around my neighbourhood
I'll gladly put you down and not for money
I'd be the first in court to testify against you



I don't care if you've got 8 dishes on your roof covering the whole sky
Ain't bothering me...As I assume all feel the same way on these sites, or they wouldn't be here
I don't dabble in that anymore....easier to run fiber optic into house..
I may have interpreted...quote by Hannibalector
as referring to sat theft, when he was talking about theft in general

Most won't put up with anything illegal, including theft....except most would take sat theft out of that statement
At one time sat was a hobby..spent more time working to get the tv than watch tv
Ain't no hobby any more...it is what is...individual interpretation as you say


Originally Posted by Hannibalector

thanks for making my point, appreciate it, it's also the duty as a citizen to report evidence of theft to the authorities, even lawyers investigators and confidential informants.


what is there to explain? the whole judicial system revolves around somebody ratting on somebody. did you know they even have anonymous hotlines where you can phone in and rat somebody out for money? It all depends on the persons morals and interpretations. If you have no problem with your next door neighbor running a meth lab you don't worry about it. Exactly the same as a cop pulling you over for speeding and letting you off with a warning because you were only 5mph over the limit

[kutter]

Well, any drug dealing around my neighbourhood
I'll gladly put you down and not for money
I'd be the first in court to testify against you



I don't care if you've got 8 dishes on your roof covering the whole sky
Ain't bothering me...As I assume all feel the same way on these sites, or they wouldn't be here
I don't dabble in that anymore....easier to run fiber optic into house..
I may have interpreted...quote by Hannibalector
as referring to sat theft, when he was talking about theft in general

Most won't put up with anything illegal, including theft....except most would take sat theft out of that statement
At one time sat was a hobby..spent more time working to get the tv than watch tv
Ain't no hobby any more...it is what is...individual interpretation as you say

somehow I think you misinterpreted Hanni's statement ... he was suggesting that Charlie shouldn't be allowed to use a civil action against end users, in reality he appears to be supporting your view ... he thinks they should be forced to go through law enforcement because a civil action requires less proof and could conceivably be used to intimidate the innocent ...

I believe that theft is theft, regardless of what was taken. If you took something without paying for it you should be on the hook if you're caught with your hand in the cookie jar. Where Hanni and I disagree is on the validity of a civil suit.

[ftaalltheway]

somehow I think you misinterpreted Hanni's statement ... he was suggesting that Charlie shouldn't be allowed to use a civil action against end users, in reality he appears to be supporting your view ... he thinks they should be forced to go through law enforcement because a civil action requires less proof and could conceivably be used to intimidate the innocent ...

I believe that theft is theft, regardless of what was taken. If you took something without paying for it you should be on the hook if you're caught with your hand in the cookie jar. Where Hanni and I disagree is on the validity of a civil suit.


does that also include corps like dn who gouge their customers?
now THAT is criminal,,,lol any wonder this whole hobby (whats left of it)
has gotten the way it is?? no one likes huge corp heads
huffing and puffing the little guy's house down no matter the reasoning

if you cant stand your signals being decrypted? then stop pickingg on endusers
go after the real thieves, p$ ,,,you think anyone (the avg joe) cares about small thieves
stealing sat signals?? no,,,only dickheads care,,,society has a whole lot
more serious issues on its plate and this fight, in the end, its all about, Power!!

and who can outsmart who

[kutter]

does that also include corps like dn who gouge their customers?
now THAT is criminal,,,lol any wonder this whole hobby (whats left of it)
has gotten the way it is?? no one likes huge corp heads
huffing and puffing the little guy's house down no matter the reasoning

if you cant stand your signals being decrypted? then stop pickingg on endusers
go after the real thieves, p$ ,,,you think anyone (the avg joe) cares about small thieves
stealing sat signals?? no,,,only dickheads care,,,society has a whole lot
more serious issues on its plate and this fight, in the end, its all about, Power!!

and who can outsmart who

of course it does ... I guess you would work for less than the going rate eh ?

it's entertainment, not a necessity, so if you can't afford it you shouldn't have it , or don't think it's worth buying then don't ...

[ftaalltheway]

of course it does ... I guess you would work for less than the going rate eh ?

it's entertainment, not a necessity, so if you can't afford it you shouldn't have it , or don't think it's worth buying then don't ...

the dikens you say? actually im sick,,,its an illness just like those crackheads
mentioned b4 if it bothers YOU that MY ilness is watching sats that are
stolen by others and shared with peeps for a reduced price? then pls
lead me to a rehab centre who can cure my disease, TV,,,ill get it anyway i can
if that means coming over to your house and steal from you to pay these p$??

you betcha, its all about my illness,,,oh wait,,,did that infuriate you?? more than the drug
addicts who would KILL for THEIR fix?? wake up call, is in order for YOU ;)

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Well, any drug dealing around my neighbourhood
I'll gladly put you down and not for money
I'd be the first in court to testify against you



I don't care if you've got 8 dishes on your roof covering the whole sky
Ain't bothering me...As I assume all feel the same way on these sites, or they wouldn't be here
I don't dabble in that anymore....easier to run fiber optic into house..
I may have interpreted...quote by Hannibalector
as referring to sat theft, when he was talking about theft in general

Most won't put up with anything illegal, including theft....except most would take sat theft out of that statement
At one time sat was a hobby..spent more time working to get the tv than watch tv
Ain't no hobby any more...it is what is...individual interpretation as you say



Most on sat paying sites would not agree with that. They pay for it and don't think others should steal it. Gas is too expensive. If you pay for it are you ok with others that steal it ?




GS2

[ftaalltheway]

Most on sat paying sites would not agree with that. They pay for it and don't think others should steal it. Gas is too expensive. If you pay for it are you ok with others that steal it ?




GS2

im fine with peeps stealing anythingt they want,,,society has NO control
over what others do,,,hell even if yu stole from me? and it has happened
i would NEVER take it to court,,,wayyy too much hassles,,,i either collect
insurance claim (if its worth it) or chalk it up, like most things in life,,,
all you can do is PROTECT yourself , family, assets, all the more as best you can

DN should stop huffing and puffing ,,,really it shows how insecure their heads are
so they should apply the same concept, "protect your signal" going after endusers is
POINTLESS in the long run. take a page out of DAVE

[kutter]

im fine with peeps stealing anythingt they want,,,society has NO control
over what others do,,,hell even if yu stole from me? and it has happened
i would NEVER take it to court,,,wayyy too much hassles,,,i either collect
insurance claim (if its worth it) or chalk it up, like most things in life,,,
all you can do is PROTECT yourself , family, assets, all the more as best you can

DN should stop huffing and puffing ,,,really it shows how insecure their heads are
so they should apply the same concept, "protect your signal" going after endusers is
POINTLESS in the long run. take a page out of DAVE

yeah, I'm sure :)

if it was a recurring crime and was costing you part of your paycheck we all know you'd be fine with it ...

[fifties]

DN should stop huffing and puffing ,,,really it shows how insecure their heads are
so they should apply the same concept, "protect your signal" going after endusers is
POINTLESS in the long run. take a page out of DAVE
Dave initiated 170,000 letters, and 17,000 lawsuits.

Bite thy tongue.

[ftaalltheway]

Dave initiated 170,000 letters, and 17,000 lawsuits.

Bite thy tongue.

was refering to *signal protection*

and like i said im not stealing signals someone else is and offering me a
key to decrypt,,,if i was stealing sat signals i would program a subbed
card with a subbed ird ,,,i use a pefectly legal
fta ird for my viewing pleasures,,,the rest is all speculation and
insinuations,,,if i was profiting commercially as a result of iks? then yah
i would be a thief in every sense,,, i know thats hard to grasp for some

[kutter]

was refering to *signal protection*

and like i said im not stealing signals someone else is and offering me a
key to decrypt,,,if i was stealing sat signals i would program a subbed
card with a subbed ird ,,,i use a pefectly legal
fta ird for my viewing pleasures,,,the rest is all speculation and
insinuations,,,if i was profiting commercially as a result of iks? then yah
i would be a thief in every sense,,, i know thats hard to grasp for some

When they send you that key, what do you think it does ?

Do you think that key is copyright protected ?

[ftaalltheway]

When they send you that key, what do you think it does ?

Do you think that key is copyright protected ?

sharing,,,

and when i send someone a donation cuz they have serious family health
concerns? and i want to help them (wuf) as best i can??ill send what i can afford

i cant help it if in return i get some kind of code, all i know is i never
asked for anything in return for my donation ,,,maybe it was meant
for someone else and was sent to me by mistake,,,who knows
but you better have a damned solid case if you decided to drag
my ass to court based on speculation,,,is all i can say

[kutter]

sharing,,,

and when i send someone a donation cuz they have serious family health
concerns? and i want to help them (wuf) as best i can??ill send what i can afford

i cant help it if in return i get some kind of code, all i know is i never
asked for anything in return for my donation ,,,maybe it was meant
for someone else and was sent to me by mistake,,,who knows
but you better have a damned solid case if you decided to drag
my ass to court based on speculation,,,is all i can say

sharing what ?

you claim you aren't decoding anything ... then what's the key for ?

[Hannibalector]

for the record I was just screwing around with Hanni, anyone that can read, knows how he feels about the providers and large corporations in general :)

theres probably only two people on the forums with opinions I respect, you and TS.

[Hannibalector]

im fine with peeps stealing anythingt they want,,,society has NO control
over what others do,,,hell even if yu stole from me? and it has happened
i would NEVER take it to court,,,wayyy too much hassles,,,i either collect
insurance claim (if its worth it) or chalk it up, like most things in life,,,
all you can do is PROTECT yourself , family, assets, all the more as best you can

DN should stop huffing and puffing ,,,really it shows how insecure their heads are
so they should apply the same concept, "protect your signal" going after endusers is
POINTLESS in the long run. take a page out of DAVE

you get anything stolen nowadays you get a file number and told to call your insurance agent

[fifties]

and like i said im not stealing signals someone else is and offering me a
key to decrypt,,,

,,,if i was profiting commercially
So we can infer that there is no dish antenna on your roof, aimed at DN's satellites, and in violation of the DMCA by intercepting encrypted signals. All you are doing is receiving strings of numbers and letters over the internet. Fascinating how you can get a picture on your TV set with just that...

And your "profiting" doesn't have to be commercial, i.e., for sale to others. Your viewing the purloined signals is your "profit", because you are getting goods W/O paying the provider for them.

[ftaalltheway]

you get anything stolen nowadays you get a file number and told to call your insurance agent

true, that,,,unless you kow or SUSPECT who it is,,,nothing more you can do
hell you can get urself in deep doo doo if you dared accuse anyone, even
if your right cuz ya never what retaliation lie ahead
,,,best to leave the finger pointing to authorities imo,,and move
on

[Hannibalector]

Loss Prevention ? what happens to people that are alleged to have shoplifted ? are they detained in the US like in Canada until authorities have been notified ? department stores, grocery stores and...

[ftaalltheway]

So we can infer that there is no dish antenna on your roof, aimed at DN's satellites, and in violation of the DMCA by intercepting encrypted signals. All you are doing is receiving strings of numbers and letters over the internet. Fascinating how you can get a picture on your TV set with just that...

And your "profiting" doesn't have to be commercial, i.e., for sale to others. Your viewing the purloined signals is your "profit", because you are getting goods W/O paying the provider for them.

the dikens you say?

[Hannibalector]

shoplifters actually have to be proven guilty with respect to the criminal code and are not charged civily as it is an offence to society at large, they are considered nuisances of the community

[Hannibalector]

When they send you that key, what do you think it does ?

Do you think that key is copyright protected ?

how would you know ? as far as anything I've seen you talk about you seem to think because someone purchased a code they're guilty of stealing something, it's automatic for you, forget to prove they STOLE anything at all, if loss prevention hears of a couple of youths intending to steel from Jersey City theres nothing they can do until theyre caught in the act right ? you think it's ok for intent, intent doesn't mean ****, you think it's ok for the providers to have a special set of circumstances just for them, you think 51% is ok to **** someones life up over versus reasonable doubt. I'm disgusted by complacency I beleive in rights.

[ftaalltheway]

Amen, brother

[sodusme]

Theft of intellectual property is fair game in my book....

You don't want your 'intellectual' property to get stolen....then get some more 'intellect' and secure it better. That is way I view intellectual property theft. :thumbsup:

[kutter]

If you're caught red handed with the goods, outside of the store, they have the right to call Law Enforcement and request to have you charged. However, they are not required by law to do so. Many...

[ftaalltheway]

Amen, brother

,,,bump bump

[Hannibalector]

yes I would, if I had it recorded to ....oh my <br />
<br />
whatever do you mean caught red handed with the goods ? codes don't equal goods, they equal crap

[ftaalltheway]

this post was meant here in the first place :) <br />
<br />
c/p <br />
<br />
one would think we, in this community, would go out of their <br />
way to offer constructive ways to try and beat DNs latest, tactics <br />
vis avis...

[kutter]

how would you know ? as far as anything I've seen you talk about you seem to think because someone purchased a code they're guilty of stealing something, it's automatic for you, forget to prove they STOLE anything at all, if loss prevention hears of a couple of youths intending to steel from Jersey City theres nothing they can do until theyre caught in the act right ? you think it's ok for intent, intent doesn't mean ****, you think it's ok for the providers to have a special set of circumstances just for them, you think 51% is ok to **** someones life up over versus reasonable doubt. I'm disgusted by complacency I beleive in rights.

how would I know what ?

what the key was for or whether it is copyrighted ?

the answer is yes :)

maybe you would care to explain why they purchased a code that allowed them to access an IKS server ?

They will have every opportunity to prove their innocence. Even those that are guilty will be afforded the opportunity to screw the system.

[Hannibalector]

how would I know what ?

what the key was for or whether it is copyrighted ?

the answer is yes :)

maybe you would care to explain why they purchased a code that allowed them to access an IKS server ?
They will have every opportunity to prove their innocence. Even those that are guilty will be afforded the opportunity to screw the system.

absolutely kutter, jeez mon ami like I'd neglect the opportunity to remind you that buying a code doesn't mean you stole anything

[ftaalltheway]

calling the authorities is not an automatic,,,its manager's discretion <br />
many many yrs ago i ran down a shoplifter and called on him <br />
cuz he was well known but there are times you have to weigh out...

[kutter]

this post was meant here in the first place :)

c/p

one would think we, in this community, would go out of their
way to offer constructive ways to try and beat DNs latest, tactics
vis avis these trumped up letters and claims,,,but no most
are quite happy you fend for yourselves,,but they were quite happy
selling you anything to do with iks,,but if shiiit hits the fann??
all theyll say is, you should have kknown better,,,or
i told you so,,,etc etc,,, makes me sick,
quite frankly the double standards this has developed into by many

sorry you feel let down ... that's about all the sympathy I can muster :)

[ftaalltheway]

sorry you feel let down ... that's about all the sympathy I can muster :)

it was figurative,,, lol you gave it ur best ;)

[kutter]

absolutely kutter, jeez mon ami like I'd neglect the opportunity to remind you that buying a code doesn't mean you stole anything

We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out in court.

Frankly, I don't know how a judge will view the purchase of codes. My gut feeling is that even though it's circumstantial it will not be viewed favorably.

[ftaalltheway]

We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out in court.

Frankly, I don't know how a judge will view the purchase of codes. My gut feeling is that even though it's circumstantial it will not be viewed favorably.

if that judge doesnt see this for what it reaaly is? then he/she is
bought and paid for,,,hows that for a gut feeling? :)

[Nostradamus]

hmmm 596 posts in one thread a new record?

[mudflap]

yes I would, if I had it recorded to ....oh my

whatever do you mean caught red handed with the goods ? codes don't equal goods, they equal crap

thats what i said in another post when a member was just going to pay up but a few others seem to think thats the right thing to do.....so do what you want to guys but if they come knocking on my door i am going to atleast stand my ground and make them prove it

[dishuser]

thats what i said in another post when a member was just going to pay up but a few others seem to think thats the right thing to do.....so do what you want to guys but if they come knocking on my door i am going to atleast stand my ground and make them prove it

I hope you got deep pockets

[Peachseed]

Like some are saying...They have to prove you used the code in court before it is stealing...Buying a code is not stealing anything...Buying a gun is not murder...But some are saying it is...Same thing...

[JCO]

Like some are saying...They have to prove you used the code in court before it is stealing...Buying a code is not stealing anything...Buying a gun is not murder...But some are saying it is...Same thing...

Lets see what the judge says..

[dishuser]

Like some are saying...They have to prove you used the code in court before it is stealing...Buying a code is not stealing anything...Buying a gun is not murder...But some are saying it is...Same thing...

you buy a gun and then what?
you use it at a gun range?
what is the code used for?
channel practice?

[Peachseed]

It is only intent...Not proof... They have got to prove you used the code...

[dishuser]

It is only intent...Not proof... They have got to prove you used the code...

no they don't
it's a civil matter
don't believe me?ask oj

[fifties]

no they don't
it's a civil matter
don't believe me?ask oj
Oh I think that they do.

And OJ isn't a valid comparison, in that they had more goods on him than just one item, as we are discussing here.

I think a reasonable defense is to point to previous court rulings which determined that just because an item that could be used for piracy was in the defendants possession, does not mean that it was used for such.

[dishuser]

Oh I think that they do.

And OJ isn't a valid comparison, in that they had more goods on him than just one item, as we are discussing here.

I think a reasonable defense is to point to previous court rulings which determined that just because an item that could be used for piracy was in the defendants possession, does not mean that it was used for such.

oj didn't even live in the house when they found the 2 bootloaders

[alex70olds]

Oh I think that they do.

And OJ isn't a valid comparison, in that they had more goods on him than just one item, as we are discussing here.

I think a reasonable defense is to point to previous court rulings which determined that just because an item that could be used for piracy was in the defendants possession, does not mean that it was used for such.

How about TDG, Satfta, BL etc that had judgements based on number of downloads of bins? Not once did they prove the bins were actually used. They did not have to under the DMCA. The contention is that bins and codes have no other use than to circumvent the plaintiffs encryption.

[alex70olds]

oj didn't even live in the house when they found the 2 bootloaders
LMFAO absolutely DTV VS OJ, fact.

[dishuser]

How about TDG, Satfta, BL etc that had judgements based on number of downloads of bins? Not once did they prove the bins were actually used. They did not have to under the DMCA. The contention is that bins and codes have no other use than to circumvent the plaintiffs encryption.
satfta and bins?thought he was reading tsops ;)

[alex70olds]

satfta and bins?thought he was reading tsops ;)

Yeah lol, bins was not really accurate lol. Alex was on of the good ones. Here you can get insight into what the courts think of INTENT.

17803

[alex70olds]

My point was, the plaintiff was awarded damages based on downloads. Never once did they have to prove the files downloaded were actually used to circumvent plaintiffs encryption.

17805

[fifties]

My point was, the plaintiff was awarded damages based on downloads. Never once did they have to prove the files downloaded were actually used to circumvent plaintiffs encryption.

17805
Yes, but let's keep things in a correct order.

TDG's case revolved around his position at Viewtech, and the disseminating of bins that were deemed to be illegal at his trial. He was a purveyor of hardware and software used to hack DN.

OJ Simpson is a public figure, and someone to make an example of.

Neither of these two cases have anything to do with busted IKS end users, nor are there any valid similarities, beyond the basic premise of hacking the providers signal.

I think the crux of the argument is simply, does mere possession of codes, proven by a purchase record, justify a judgment, without any other supporting evidence, such as proof of a receiver, or logs from the ISP of the defendant, showing connection to the server IP?

This could go either way, depending on the strength of the defendants arguments, and in fact it's possible that there could be opposite decisions in different cases, based on that.

[MarvinGardens]

I think the crux of the argument is simply, does mere possession of codes, proven by a purchase record, justify a judgment, without any other supporting evidence

That is the issue in the present IKS end user cases.

The cases against TDG, OJ, SatFTA a.k.a. SERGIO ALEXEYEV, and others like them were easily decided by the court. That is because the DMCA specifically prohibits the "offer[ing] to the public, provid[ing], or otherwise traffic[king] in any technology,
product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that..."

The issue of simple possession of decryption technology by an end-user without anything more is not specifically addressed in the DMCA. Enactments of the DMCA in other countries do prohibit mere possession by end-users.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Like some are saying...They have to prove you used the code in court before it is stealing...Buying a code is not stealing anything...Buying a gun is not murder...But some are saying it is...Same thing...


No not necesarrily in civil court. They have to pursade to the court by the propondserance of the evidence it was morely like than not. A gun is legal I don't think you can say there is legal porpose to buy the code.



GS2

[fifties]

No not necesarrily in civil court. They have to pursade to the court by the propondserance of the evidence it was morely like than not. A gun is legal I don't think you can say there is legal porpose to buy the code.



GS2


preponderance - The Free Dictionary
www.thefreedictionary.com/preponderancepre·pon·der·ance (pr -p n d r- ns) also pre·pon·der·an·cy (- n-s ). n. Superiority in weight, force, importance, or influence.
Going by the strict definition of the term, possession alone may not be quite enough, when countered by, "I never used it".

Now if the court had an additional piece of evidence by the plaintiff (proof of ownership of a satellite receiver, or ISP logs showing connection to the server), the first of these examples, while not proving usage, certainly would display an ability, so circumstantial might be enough, while the second is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, unless the defendant claimed that his un-encrypted wireless router was piggybacked, throwing a possible doubt into the mix.

[hondoharry]

Wow, how many times are you guys gonna keep saying the same things over and over and . . .

[dishuser]

Going by the strict definition of the term, possession alone may not be quite enough, when countered by, "I never used it".

Now if the court had an additional piece of evidence by the plaintiff (proof of ownership of a satellite receiver, or ISP logs showing connection to the server), the first of these examples, while not proving usage, certainly would display an ability, so circumstantial might be enough, while the second is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, unless the defendant claimed that his un-encrypted wireless router was piggybacked, throwing a possible doubt into the mix.
or them posting up or down or freezing...lol

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Going by the strict definition of the term, possession alone may not be quite enough, when countered by, "I never used it".

Now if the court had an additional piece of evidence by the plaintiff (proof of ownership of a satellite receiver, or ISP logs showing connection to the server), the first of these examples, while not proving usage, certainly would display an ability, so circumstantial might be enough, while the second is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, unless the defendant claimed that his un-encrypted wireless router was piggybacked, throwing a possible doubt into the mix.




Its better to get the legal definition of preponderance. Your not going to have to prove usage if circumstantial evidence is strong. Circumstantial evidence can prove usage without physically proving it. For me the buying of the code that has only one purpose might in itself be enough but I agree a court might say otherwise. I do not think we are going to see the answer to this because I think it won't go to trial but never know.




GS2

[fifties]

or them posting up or down or freezing...lol
Good call; I forgot about posting in forums; DN however would need to be able to tie the nic with the defendant. On the boards where wuf had moderator access, of course, that might make it easier for them.

[hondoharry]

DN however would need to be able to tie the nic with the defendant. On the boards where wuf had moderator access, of course, that might make it easier for them.

That has been established. The letters mention the user's nic. Obviously gotten from Wuf's spreadsheet.

[Peachseed]

Another thing dish has to consider, is how many customers are they willing to loose over this deal...Some of the people they sent letters to were customers at one time or another...You call that cutting off your nose to spite your face...

[Nostradamus]

Another thing dish has to consider, is how many customers are they willing to loose over this deal...Some of the people they sent letters to were customers at one time or another...You call that cutting off your nose to spite your face...

not realyy, the chance of them losing a customer because of this is remote. Many people had a basic sub and were using the boxes to supplement their programming as well. I would imagine some are even locked into contracts and that DN could sue them for piracy and at the same time they are still paying for the basic pkg. Losing a thousand customers is no big deal to them and the customers they would be losing is just low end subs anyway and no big money to be made there

[Peachseed]

For me it was not a low end sub. I had a everything package for several years...As some say "it was a hobby"...That was a true saying for me and I am sure it was true for a lot more that I know...I have always had a everything package...Dish, direct, cable now...
How can they say you are stealing if you are paying for everything???

[dishuser]

For me it was not a low end sub. I had a every-thing package for several years...As some say "it was a hobby"...That was a true saying for me and I am sure it was true for a lot more that I know...

so what programs or bins did you create with your hobby?

[Peachseed]

so what programs or bins did you create with your hobby?

None...You are the VIP...

What it odd to me. Before this web site went down there was nobody saying anything against iks...Now there is a lot of mods, VIPs and others against it... Maybe you guys need to change the name "satFIXtrueFTA" ...lol

[JCO]

Enough of the mudslinging.. Lets keep the posts on topic please.

[dishuser]

None...You are the VIP...
then how was it a hobby?
I shoplift from Lowe's but it isn't a hobby...lol

[fifties]

For me it was not a low end sub. I had a everything package for several years...As some say "it was a hobby"...That was a true saying for me and I am sure it was true for a lot more that I know...I have always had a everything package...Dish, direct, cable now...
How can they say you are stealing if you are paying for everything???
Does the everything package include PPV's?

One stunt that Dave pulled years ago was to cross-reference names -from credit card receipts of busted dealers- with his own sub base.

From matches he then had his legal goons depose subs who had downgraded their service after the purchase of piracy paraphernalia, and proceeded with suits against them. Real sweetheart he was...

[fputs]

For me it was not a low end sub. I had a everything package for several years...As some say "it was a hobby"...That was a true saying for me and I am sure it was true for a lot more that I know...I have always had a everything package...Dish, direct, cable now...
How can they say you are stealing if you are paying for everything???

LOL, I doubt that your legit everything package that you bought contained daily PPV, Porn, etc.

[MarvinGardens]

One stunt that Dave pulled years ago was to cross-reference names -from credit card receipts of busted dealers- with his own sub base.

From matches he then had his legal goons depose subs who had downgraded their service after the purchase of piracy paraphernalia, and proceeded with suits against them. Real sweetheart he was...

DN did the exact same thing a few years ago.

[kyzursozay]

then how was it a hobby?
I shoplift from Lowe's but it isn't a hobby...lol

even better if facilitated by dumb employees ...... lol (when a college-age cashier had trouble scanning a big wood spool of 100' 6g3w SO cord & the receipt including several other expensive electrical items should have been well over $450 came to $35.68.......... I QUICKLY PUT away my cc, paid cash & thanked the clueless young lady......lol

[Peachseed]

TrueFTA for 28 years LOL

Semper Fi

[hondoharry]

TrueFTA for 28 years LOL

Semper Fi

Be careful Peachy. DU can put down whoever he wants but if you respond, JCO will be all over your a s s like a double standard.

[dishuser]

Be careful Peachy. DU can put down whoever he wants but if you respond, JCO will be all over your a s s like a double standard.

I never put them down
stop your whining

[hondoharry]

I never put them down
stop your whining

Uh, OK. Roger, wilco, over and out

[Just_angel]

Be careful Peachy. DU can put down whoever he wants but if you respond, JCO will be all over your a s s like a double standard.

really now !!! l think you best stop this kind of posting

thanks

[Peachseed]

I have been down for a long time hondo...You all know that...lol

It is for the best anyway...

If you want to see what down looks like, go to marzone....

[JCO]

Be careful Peachy. DU can put down whoever he wants but if you respond, JCO will be all over your a s s like a double standard.

Well hondo when you have contributed as much as Du has to this site I may accord you some tolerance as well.. In the meantime if you dont like the way the site is run , open up your own..

[hondoharry]

I have been down for a long time hondo...You all know that...lol

It is for the best anyway...

If you want to see what down looks like, go to marzone....

Semper Fidelis

[fifties]

Semper Fidelis
Buncha ex-jarheads, lol.

Ex ground pounder/hill humper myself...

[rainman2]

Wife said the mailman had a large white envelope from an attorney in Texas and she did not know what it was about so she did not sign it. The mailperson left with the envelope. I went to the post office this morning to try to get it back, but already returned to sender.
I am sure it was from you know who I know they are making an offer but it's probably too late for that now. Guess I'll have to wait for the second letter.

[joeblow]

Wife said the mailman had a large white envelope from an attorney in Texas and she did not know what it was about so she did not sign it. The mailperson left with the envelope. I went to the post office this morning to try to get it back, but already returned to sender.
I am sure it was from you know who I know they are making an offer but it's probably too late for that now. Guess I'll have to wait for the second letter.

they will get you, sooner or later, good luck

[sodusme]

Wife said the mailman had a large white envelope from an attorney in Texas and she did not know what it was about so she did not sign it. The mailperson left with the envelope. I went to the post office this morning to try to get it back, but already returned to sender.
I am sure it was from you know who I know they are making an offer but it's probably too late for that now. Guess I'll have to wait for the second letter.

I posted this on another couple forums so I'll offer it up to you as well....


http://www.piratecardblues.com/

I know, I know this is the opposite of what I preach but not everyone is a gambler like I am. I would go wits to wits against these guys any day but for anyone wanting 'legal representation' this guy sounds like he knows his stuff and I would be remiss if I didn't pass it along to you.

Good luck I have a feeling you're gonna need it. ;)

[hondoharry]

The best advice I've heard is to try to negotiate it down before they take it to court. Give the lawyers a sob story that will put them in tears taking up a collection to help you out. Try a few buzz words like veteran, Afghanistan, disabled, PTSD, divorce, child support, foreclosure, suicide, etc. If you feel capable to do this without a lawyer you may get out for under $2,000. Waiting till court procedures could put you out over $15,000. Look for the cheapest way out.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Toysoft,


Not saying what your posting is not of interest maybe to some and I know you want to post about Murdoch on as many sites as possible but why not start a separate thread for your message because it has nothing to do with this thread about demand letters to end users.



GS2

[Rongcon]

Reading this stuff, make me think twice, third or 4th time before to donation. damn

[Russ]

Can you post the letter envelope what the lawyer co. Name, so that if I can recieve, I will turn it down. Thanks

[budyyy]

What's the statute of limitations on these violations?

[dishuser]

What's the statute of limitations on these violations?

I think it's 3 years so more to come

[Nostradamus]

Can you post the letter envelope what the lawyer co. Name, so that if I can recieve, I will turn it down. Thanks

and that would get you no where, refusing the letter is not a stay of proceedings. They will eventually proceed against you whether you are present or not, whether you have been officially notified or not. All you really succeed in doing is delaying things a bit so that won't get you off the hook and unless you have a terminal disease and plan on checking out soon

[Grave Digger]

Can you post the letter envelope what the lawyer co. Name, so that if I can recieve, I will turn it down. Thanks


LOL, yeah, good luck with that, bury your head in the sand and it will go away? :rolleyes:

if it was that easy to avoid a court case, laws and courts would not exist

[tito2020]

your name sound fimilar hmmm

[Russ]

Did somebody pay $3500

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

and that would get you no where, refusing the letter is not a stay of proceedings. They will eventually proceed against you whether you are present or not, whether you have been officially notified or not. All you really succeed in doing is delaying things a bit so that won't get you off the hook and unless you have a terminal disease and plan on checking out soon



Right there is certainly alternative serving options available if someone is avoiding being served. You can get a substituted order of service from the court.


If all people had to do was refused service to get out than there would be no cases.



GS2

[Grave Digger]

If all people had to do was refused service to get out than there would be no cases.





exactly,

trying to hide will get you nowhere.....except deeper in debt

[bigbird]

exactly,

trying to hide will get you nowhere.....except deeper in debt

Exactly. Take a look at satscum and see the $10k default judgements being made. Not acknowledging the letter and not showing up to court puts you deeper in debt.

bigbird

[norm155]

I myself have called them worked out a deal ..the only options i got was pay it all or over a 6 month period..Some say go toe to toe with them...maybe if you got the money to fight it..my time and job was worth more than the fine !!

[hondoharry]

I myself have called them worked out a deal ..the only options i got was pay it all or over a 6 month period..Some say go toe to toe with them...maybe if you got the money to fight it..my time and job was worth more than the fine !!

I'd say you made a smart move. No additional lawyer fees who will tell you the same thing.

[sodusme]

That's $583 a month that's a Cadillac car note or a "starter home" mortgage payment. :jawdrop:

But every man has to assess his own options and make the best decision for himself. Good luck to you moving forward.

[MarvinGardens]

I myself have called them worked out a deal ..the only options i got was pay it all or over a 6 month period..Some say go toe to toe with them...maybe if you got the money to fight it..my time and job was worth more than the fine !!

That was the only option you had considering the evidence DN has against W'Man's customers. Unfortunately Magi (DN v. Magi) found out the hard way and ended up paying many, many thousands instead of the original $3500.
'

[Russ]

That's not good for us, so better stop buying donation

[ShotGun]

I am telling the truth stop moderating me

[torpainter]

I am telling the truth stop moderating me

Truth? All Im seeing is a lot of nonsense posts!!!

[nobody]

I am sure you are sir ... but going crazy on a public forum isn't going to solve the problem ........ i bought you a round of beer's to help you relax ...... ;D

[ShotGun]

3500 bucks,,,,get u..................now you tell me

[torpainter]

3500 bucks,,,,get u..................now you tell me

And you are saying this post makes sense?

[nobody]

@ShotGun , nothing you're posting here makes sense ....... this wufman you speak of isn't reading this thread ..... please revert back to Post#1 & read the whole thread , then you'll get a idea of what's going on ...... Please

[JCO]

And you are saying this post makes sense?

Drink a quart of cheap scotch and it will LOL

[guarionexpr]

That's $583 a month that's a Cadillac car note or a "starter home" mortgage payment. :jawdrop:

But every man has to assess his own options and make the best decision for himself. Good luck to you moving forward.

I got my Dish summons letter today and I have asked them to provide me a payment plan, they have my info so why battle something I know I can't win they have three codes with info, even though only one was for my use and two were for relatives,decided I should payoff and sleep better

[sodusme]

I got my Dish summons letter today and I have asked them to provide me a payment plan, they have my info so why battle something I know I can't win they have three codes with info, even though only one was for my use and two were for relatives,decided I should payoff and sleep better

Not to be a smart*ss or anything but are the relatives willing to help you at all? Since you're all in this together it sounds like?

[ratanous]

I got my Dish summons letter today and I have asked them to provide me a payment plan, they have my info so why battle something I know I can't win they have three codes with info, even though only one was for my use and two were for relatives,decided I should payoff and sleep better

Just curious if it is $3500 total or $3500 per code?

[Grave Digger]

I got my Dish summons letter today and I have asked them to provide me a payment plan, they have my info so why battle something I know I can't win they have three codes with info, even though only one was for my use and two were for relatives,decided I should payoff and sleep better

you are a wise man,

nobody is winning these cases, and nobody ever will,

solve the small problem before it turns into a nightmare, $3500 is cheap, you will be paying alot more if it goes to court

[toysoft]

Something that could be interesting, old but still actual, <br />
<br />
TS <br />
<br />
------ <br />
<br />
Way back in the 1990s, the idea that someone involved in litigation with part of News Corporation was a pretty novel...

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Something that could be interesting, old but still actual,

TS


Comon its the second time its been pointed that what your posting has nothing to do with this thread regarding a demand letter being sent to end users.



GS2

[h_d]

I myself have called them worked out a deal ..the only options i got was pay it all or over a 6 month period..Some say go toe to toe with them...maybe if you got the money to fight it..my time and job was worth more than the fine !!
So you are discussing something that is a CONFIDENTAL agreement right?

[Hannibalector]

So you are discussing something that is a CONFIDENTAL agreement right?

it's likely a demand letter not a court order or anything sealed confidential by a court, he's free to discuss any arrangements he's made

[Hannibalector]

Comon its the second time its been pointed that what your posting has nothing to do with this thread regarding a demand letter being sent to end users.



GS2

you gonna be ok ?.....lol

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

you gonna be ok ?.....lol



Perhaps you can encourage him to start his own thread on Murdoch and what happened 23 years ago while letting him know it does not relate to end users getting demand letters in 2013 23 yrs later from DN. :thumbsup:




GS2

[1boxman]

Hijack a hijack ...lol Why not.

[Fare]

I was registered member few years back on this forum. Forgot all login info so i have to register again.
Anyway two weeks ago i get letter from money hungry lawyers and their POS costumer Dish N. for 3.5k or lawsuit. Now email came they wanna 5k or lawsuit with in 3 wk. What a crazy timing. I know this is serious and i have to take it seriously. But i don't have that kind of money. What is their problem.
I know there was a couple lawsuit lost on this case and defendants usually don't have lawyer or they doesn't know what they talking about or they don't show up for court dates.

[surfinisfun]

Been reading some others got e-mail looking for $ as well.

Fact is they will not e-mail you looking for money. Who is this e-mail from? lets do a little snoop dog.

[Fare]

Been reading some others got e-mail looking for $ as well.

Fact is they will not e-mail you looking for money. Who is this e-mail from? lets do a little snoop dog.

Email is from texas lawyer firm that handles all IKS cases from 2010
I know they making pretty damn good money I bet thousands letters are sent and 30-40% that receive letter get scared and pay full sum without any negotiations. Anyway letters are coming from early 2011 since they got DA and wufshi* later on and how many people went to court 10 or less i think right????

[dishuser]

Been reading some others got e-mail looking for $ as well.

Fact is they will not e-mail you looking for money. Who is this e-mail from? lets do a little snoop dog.

why wouldn't they email?
they already sent a letter and they know email addy's...lol

[dishuser]

Email is from texas lawyer firm that handles all IKS cases from 2010
I know they making pretty damn good money I bet thousands letters are sent and 30-40% that receive letter get scared and pay full sum without any negotiations. Anyway letters are coming from early 2011 since they got DA and wufshi* later on and how many people went to court 10 or less i think right????

cases?
or people defending themselves?

[kboom]

I was registered member few years back on this forum. Forgot all login info so i have to register again.
Anyway two weeks ago i get letter from money hungry lawyers and their POS costumer Dish N. for 3.5k or lawsuit. Now email came they wanna 5k or lawsuit with in 3 wk. What a crazy timing. I know this is serious and i have to take it seriously. But i don't have that kind of money. What is their problem.
I know there was a couple lawsuit lost on this case and defendants usually don't have lawyer or they doesn't know what they talking about or they don't show up for court dates.


Yeppers that's the way they work. So you must have ignored the registered letter now they send an email for 5k next you will be in court and it will cost you 10k. Good luck.

[surfinisfun]

why wouldn't they email?
they already sent a letter and they know email addy's...lol

Yup, to my surprise the e-mails seem legit.

[1boxman]

Emails could be a little fishing to confirm the person . Now given that emails can be lost very easy ..and accounts not used .hacked .etc ..unless they added a confirm read to it . Still ..cheap way for them kill a few stones .


Maybe someone could post the email .?. delete your info ..header would be good ..?

[alex70olds]

Email is from texas lawyer firm that handles all IKS cases from 2010
I know they making pretty damn good money I bet thousands letters are sent and 30-40% that receive letter get scared and pay full sum without any negotiations. Anyway letters are coming from early 2011 since they got DA and wufshi* later on and how many people went to court 10 or less i think right????

To the best of my count, US cases -
72 DA
16 Wuff to date.

10 cases still pending
37 cases settled usually $10K for Plaintiff
34 cases default judgement for $10K for Plaintiff
2 cases Summary Judgement usually min of $10K
5 cases dismissed with out prejudice

[Anubis]

To the best of my count, US cases -
72 DA
16 Wuff to date.

10 cases still pending
37 cases settled usually $10K for Plaintiff
34 cases default judgement for $10K for Plaintiff
2 cases Summary Judgement usually min of $10K
5 cases dismissed with out prejudice

Jeez alex, You got a "Big Bang Theory" chalk board on the go at home? :tehe:

Based on this info anyone even thinking of fighting the letter is pretty much SOL.

[goadus]

Just read a post entitled iks explained. It reads like it would be hard to track where the cw's go as it bounces around the world. They may know a code was purchased but did it work? I guess it dosen't matter to them. They just want money. Anyway I believe I would seek legal advice if it were me. Wonder how the 5 cases were dismissed without prejudice?

[Fare]

To the best of my count, US cases -
72 DA
16 Wuff to date.

10 cases still pending
37 cases settled usually $10K for Plaintiff
34 cases default judgement for $10K for Plaintiff
2 cases Summary Judgement usually min of $10K
5 cases dismissed with out prejudice

Woow little more than i thought :noidea:

[Grave Digger]

I was registered member few years back on this forum. Forgot all login info so i have to register again.
Anyway two weeks ago i get letter from money hungry lawyers and their POS costumer Dish N. for 3.5k or lawsuit. Now email came they wanna 5k or lawsuit with in 3 wk. What a crazy timing. I know this is serious and i have to take it seriously. But i don't have that kind of money. What is their problem.
I know there was a couple lawsuit lost on this case and defendants usually don't have lawyer or they doesn't know what they talking about or they don't show up for court dates.

they dont care if you have the money or not, you will be paying it one way or another, once a judgement is issued they will seize your bank account, contact your employer and take it directly from your pay check, no way around it,

settle now for the 5K or it will end up costing you double at 10K....pretty easy decision if you know grade 6 math, dont stick your head in the sand and think it will go away.....it will not

[Grave Digger]

Based on this info anyone even thinking of fighting the letter is pretty much SOL.

yup, i agree

[hondoharry]

Based on this info anyone even thinking of fighting the letter is pretty much SOL.

What happened to all the bravado early on in this thread about them fishing, ignore the letter, they got no case, get a lawyer. Never understood about paying a lawyer if they all tell you to pay up. Throwing good money after bad.

[Anubis]

What happened to all the bravado early on in this thread about them fishing, ignore the letter, they got no case, get a lawyer. Never understood about paying a lawyer if they all tell you to pay up. Throwing good money after bad.

Why you asking me? Not once did I say they were fishing, or to ignore the letter. My advise when I did post was to consult with a lawyer.

[sodusme]

My advice was and still is you can beat it. <br />
<br />
You just have to A) have a decent attorney with some balls and brains or B) roll the dice and represent yourself. Now I know all the nay sayers will...

[Fare]

Exactly <br />
And i also think if you live in little bigger metropolitan areas where they have lawyer. Or where texas lawyer firm can get another lawyer from that area and if they feel you are relevantly...

[Fare]

they dont care if you have the money or not, you will be paying it one way or another, once a judgement is issued they will seize your bank account, contact your employer and take it directly from your pay check, no way around it,

settle now for the 5K or it will end up costing you double at 10K....pretty easy decision if you know grade 6 math, dont stick your head in the sand and think it will go away.....it will not

Just because cry babies like this one and many others that saying "settle, settle settle," Dish have a case 100%. People admitting guilt and dish building case stronger and stronger

[Anubis]

Just because cry babies like this one and many others that saying "settle, settle settle," Dish have a case 100%. People admiting

I'd bet the farm you wouldn't be posting in such a manner if you received a demand letter.:innocent:

[Fare]

I'd bet the farm you wouldn't be posting in such a manner if you received a demand letter.:innocent:

I wish i got one few weeks ago following email not long ago also

[dishuser]

Just because cry babies like this one and many others that saying "settle, settle settle," Dish have a case 100%. People admitting guilt and dish building case stronger and stronger

let us know how you make out fighting it..have a feeling it's gonna cost you more than 5k

[sodusme]

Honestly if I received a letter I'd be researching everything I could find on court room etiquette and procedure. I damn sure wouldn't pay an attorney more than it would cost me to settle and I wouldn't pay these black mailers either.

I'd go down fighting even if I did have to represent myself. If you don't have the money to pay it or an attorney why not fight it? So you look foolish in court? Big deal. What do you have to lose? You can't just ignore it and it isn't going to go away so you might as well roll the dice.

[Grave Digger]

Just because cry babies like this one and many others that saying "settle, settle settle," Dish have a case 100%. People admitting guilt and dish building case stronger and stronger

yeah sure buddy, you can talk big all you want, i know you dont want to admit the truth, but your doomed,

start saving up your pennies, your going to need them,

dont be a fool, nobody has or is ever going to beat this, DN has better lawyers then you could ever pay or find, pay the small amount before it grows like a weed,

3500 or 10,000.....you do the math

[dishuser]

yeah sure buddy, you can talk big all you want, i know you dont want to admit the truth, but your doomed,

start saving up your pennies, your going to need them,

dont be a fool, nobody has or is ever going to beat this, DN has better lawyers then you could ever pay or find, pay the small amount before it grows like a weed,

3500 or 10,000.....you do the mathit's 5k now

[kboom]

Hire Sodusme he will get it dismissed for you. Or go down trying. No hardfeelings Sod just stoking the fires a little.

[toysoft]

Still on the same subject, but against these majors who are trying us to get us on court, very interesting to read,

Neil Chenoweth from AFR reports :

I’ve always regarded News Corporation's accounts as a little like Great Uncle Albert's watch. There's always something rattling around inside and if you shake it about enough, something interesting invariably falls out. Nothing wrong with that!

Today's Australian Federal Court of Appeal decision is horribly complicated but essentially focuses on a 1989 meeting where execs for four different subsi...diaries handed around a $3 billion cheque. The cheque ended up where it started. Just over a decade later it triggered a $A2 billion tax deduction after the $A fell against the greenback. It was an internal load between News Corp subsidiaries so there was no actual loss. But the court confirmed there was a $2 billion tax deduction.

That's the second big tax win for News Corp. Two separate internal shuffles that cost News nothing--nil-zero have given it $3.5 billion in tax deductions. Noice

Saturday 21st of July 2012: Numbers game

It's always a happy surprise to find long-lost mementos in a bottom drawer – photographs perhaps, the odd document say, or even a $2 billion unsecured demand note.
For public companies, these little discoveries spread cheer all around, particularly if it's two days before the end of the financial year.
On June 28, 2002, the News Ltd accountants were rummaging around the bottom of the filing cabinet when they came across documentation about a rather large US-dollar loan from one News subsidiary to another subsidiary called News Publishers Holdings
Naturally, they felt bound to repay the loan immediately. This incurred a $1.4 billion foreign exchange loss, which naturally was a tax deduction, as the Federal Court found this week, correcting a little misunderstanding by the Tax Office. Actually, News had reported another $630 million FX loss to another News company in June 2001 as well.
After News Corp reincorporated in the US in 2005, its accountants shuffled $35 billion of assets in a way that made no difference to capitalisation but created a $1.5 billion Australian tax deduction.
All up, that is $3.5 billion in Australian tax deductions from internal shuffles in Rupert Murdoch 's empire. It's like a little $1 billion present from Australian taxpayers to Our Rupe, though it's hard to locate the records of this in the News annual accounts.
Such modesty. That's terrific work by News accountants, perhaps less terrific work by the Australian government. As government mishandling goes, it's up there with pink batts in the ceiling and Building the Education Revolution.
There is a national newspaper that will be right onto a case of government profligacy like that.
Expect a campaign.

Saturday 03rd of July 2010
His paper money has great appeal

June 30 was a red-letter day for News Corporation's Australian princeling, John Hartigan, beginning with a resounding win in the Federal Court of Appeal against the naysayers at the Tax Office who were trying to accuse Rupert Murdoch's global empire of some sort of tax avoidance.
News ran into the problem back in 2005, after it had reincorporated in the US, that its US and UK operations were still owned by Australian subsidiaries which had a capital value of $39 billion. Moving them to the US could trigger a huge capital gain.
News got around this by having the subsidiary companies pay a $4 billion dividend to News Australia Holdings, then bought back their shares for $35 billion.
The dividend and the payment for the buyback were transferred to a US company which set up new holding companies in the US for $39 billion, all in the one day.
News Corp had lost nothing. Everything was the same, with a new US holding company . . . except that by paying part of the price as a dividend News was able to claim a $5 billion capital loss, which led to an Australian tax deduction of $1.5 billion.
There was absolutely no suggestion that it shaped the deal like that just to save a little money on tax, the Appeals Court ruled on Wednesday. No one could be more surprised at the result than News itself.
How much did this paper shuffling cost Australia as a tax benefit? The Prince likes to think of it as Australian taxpayers paying $567 million to see the back of Rupert Murdoch. This was loads better than the first plan, which was to buy him a gold watch
But really, that's all so 2005. Last Tuesday our Australian honcho, Our Harto was focused on new tax plays.
The changes afoot include a move by a company called Tejeku, which owns what used to be the old Herald and Weekly Times group of newspapers, which News took over back in 1987. Tejeku filed a notice it was about to redeem out of profits up to $1.2 billion of its own shares held by News Ltd at market value after redeeming $417 million of shares on June 26 last year.
Who would believe that News earned so much in Australia? Clearly that doesn't include the group's national newspaper.

[dishuser]

toysoft you're clueless

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

toysoft you're clueless


I think he knows what hes doing. As long as he can get out his publicity on Murdoch on any site on any thread hes content.


Getting it out is not the problem by why put it on totally unrelated threads. I think its about exposure to be on a thread that has interest and continuation. He throws this in as to make some connection on the subject of end users getting demand letters when there really isn't any because he has seen previous remarks.



Still on the same subject, but against these majors who are trying us to get us on court, very interesting to read[



GS2

[1boxman]

And who cares ...lol

[sodusme]

Hire Sodusme he will get it dismissed for you. Or go down trying. No hardfeelings Sod just stoking the fires a little.

LOL none at all.

I look at it this way: If you don't have the money for the $3500 than you are definitely not gonna have the money for the $5000 or the $10,000. So what do you have to lose? Yes I realize that you could get left on the hook for having to pay their attorney fees and so on but again, if you don't have the money for the $3500 to begin with what does it matter? So you'll set up a payment schedule or garnishment and have to work a little longer at least you can say you gave it a good fight. Its better than ignoring it.

[hondoharry]

LOL none at all.

I look at it this way: If you don't have the money for the $3500 than you are definitely not gonna have the money for the $5000 or the $10,000. So what do you have to lose? Yes I realize that you could get left on the hook for having to pay their attorney fees and so on but again, if you don't have the money for the $3500 to begin with what does it matter? So you'll set up a payment schedule or garnishment and have to work a little longer at least you can say you gave it a good fight. Its better than ignoring it.

Sod is right. If you don't have the money for the $3500 and no assets or wages to garnish I think he would win the court case with his arguments and no lawyer, especially if he insisted on a jury rather than a judge. They can't prove you unscrambled their signal. A good lawyer costing much more than the $3500 would have a good chance of getting you off. But most lawyers will try to save you money and tell you to get down on your knees and take it.

[Grave Digger]

I look at it this way: If you don't have the money for the $3500 than you are definitely not gonna have the money for the $5000 or the $10,000. So what do you have to lose?

what the hell kind of logic is that?

that's like saying if i don't have the money to pay my $3500 credit card bill, i might as well go ahead and rack it up to $10,000

a debt is a debt, it doesn't matter how the debt is incurred, they will get their money one way or another through a court order, they will freeze your bank account, contact your employer and take it off your pay check,

the only way you can avoid a court order is if you can live the rest of your entire life without having a bank account, and without ever having a taxable job, which is next to impossible unless you are begging for change on a street corner,

[surfinisfun]

Not really, if the person is on welfare or collecting some kind of disabled funds there's not much more the big DN lawyers could do to them.....is there?

[sodusme]

what the hell kind of logic is that?

that's like saying if i don't have the money to pay my $3500 credit card bill, i might as well go ahead and rack it up to $10,000

a debt is a debt, it doesn't matter how the debt is incurred, they will get their money one way or another through a court order, they will freeze your bank account, contact your employer and take it off your pay check,

the only way you can avoid a court order is if you can live the rest of your entire life without having a bank account, and without ever having a taxable job, which is next to impossible unless you are begging for change on a street corner,

That's right Mr. doom & gloom everyone should just pay up. What do you get kick backs on this sh*t or something? You really get p*ssed off when someone says this should be fought. I'd really like to know why? You have been beating this "Pay up or else" dead horse for long enough. I'd really like to know what your agenda is here? Why are you so hell bent that these attorneys are God or something? They put their pants on the same damn way I do buddy. They ain't nobody special.

Lets say you live in an apartment and are on disability and do not work. Just what do you propose they will take from you Mr. smart*ss? Not a God damn thing that's what!! And if you have any assets like a car you simply sell those off to your family members for a $1 then what? As long as you do it BEFORE the legal judgment is entered there isn't anything the court can do to you. I'd love for you to do some research on this sh*t instead of spouting off "Pay up or else" continually. I'm really getting tired of reading it. So do some homework and THEN post back!!!!!!


Not really, if the person is on welfare or collecting some kind of disabled funds there's not much more the big DN lawyers could do to them.....is there?

Exactly, what Mr. doom & gloom is failing to mention is there are lots of "revenue" that cannot be seized.

[surfinisfun]

Kind of funny sodusme, his nic fits.....except he seems to have everyone with a letter one foot in the grave.

And by the way i couldn't agree more with you about the lawyers and DN being human. Some think they ARE gods or something. I haven't met a person in my life that made me gaga and in aw like some seem to do with these guys.

For some it makes sense to settle and call it a day but.......this isn't a condom where one fits all.

[kboom]

Problem is that it's all based on variables.......Sod would be willing lose it all to prove that he could win in court and some people won't go that far. Looks like a simple personnel choice to me. It looks like people are just expressing there opinions as to what they would do and not trying to make you do it. Doesn't make either right or wrong.

[jeldf]

Problem is that it's all based on variables.......Sod would be willing lose it all to prove that he could win in court and some people won't go that far. Looks like a simple personnel choice to me. It looks like people are just expressing there opinions as to what they would do and not trying to make you do it. Doesn't make either right or wrong.

True. But from G Digger's first post, it has always been Pay! You have no other choice! Sod is just calling him out because there are always other options.

[buffy777]

Now I have a question. When dish buys a set of programming from the owner of the program, dosen't dish resell to a subscriber to that program? Now who is to say that this guy wulfman didn't buy the...

[Anubis]

Because you need a broadcasting license in order to sell programming.

[sodusme]

Problem is that it's all based on variables.......Sod would be willing lose it all to prove that he could win in court and some people won't go that far. Looks like a simple personnel choice to me. It looks like people are just expressing there opinions as to what they would do and not trying to make you do it. Doesn't make either right or wrong.


True. But from G Digger's first post, it has always been Pay! You have no other choice! Sod is just calling him out because there are always other options.

That is exactly right but when someone barks at me:
what the hell kind of logic is that? That kind of "opinion" can be kept to himself. I don't put up with that xxxx. If he wants to express his opinion than he needs to do it respectfully or I'll do everything I can to make him out to be the fool that he is OR the mole that he is. Which ever hat fits.

Its obvious that this guy has some type of "agenda" or "stance" to push. Like jeldf said his ONLY advice is to pay, pay and pay some more no other choice. He also likes to belittle anyone for suggesting that they would dare go against the great Dish Network and their attorneys. I can tell you these attorneys are not "experts" on the matter of how IKS works I can guarantee you that. The people right here on the forums that are pirating the signal are the true experts. That is evident by the articles of the DMCA they are quoting in this fishing expedition. Articles that they CANNOT possibly prove. If you do a little research on what they are suing under you will see what I mean. The conditions that have to be met for you to be guilty under the DMCA article they are suing under cannot be met.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

That is exactly right but when someone barks at me: That kind of "opinion" can be kept to himself. I don't put up with that xxxx. If he wants to express his opinion than he needs to do it respectfully or I'll do everything I can to make him out to be the fool that he is OR the mole that he is. Which ever hat fits.

Its obvious that this guy has some type of "agenda" or "stance" to push. Like jeldf said his ONLY advice is to pay, pay and pay some more no other choice. He also likes to belittle anyone for suggesting that they would dare go against the great Dish Network and their attorneys. I can tell you these attorneys are not "experts" on the matter of how IKS works I can guarantee you that. The people right here on the forums that are pirating the signal are the true experts. That is evident by the articles of the DMCA they are quoting in this fishing expedition. Articles that they CANNOT possibly prove. If you do a little research on what they are suing under you will see what I mean. The conditions that have to be met for you to be guilty under the DMCA article they are suing under cannot be met.


I do not see how being an expert on how IKS pirates the signal is of value in defending or prosecuting in a case like this. However what conditions need to be proved could be a factor for a court. The DMCA does not state what conditions have to be met so courts have to look at previous case law or decide on their own if the burden has been met by the plaintiff. Remember in Civil that burden is not too high.


Courts can render conflicting decisions also that later become an issue for a higher court to resolve.



GS2

[sodusme]

I do not see how being an expert on how IKS pirates the signal is of value in defending or prosecuting in a case like this. However what conditions need to be proved could be a factor for a court. The DMCA does not state what conditions have to be met so courts have to look at previous case law or decide on their own if the burden has been met by the plaintiff. Remember in Civil that burden is not too high.


Courts can render conflicting decisions also that later become an issue for a higher court to resolve.



GS2

If you can prove things such as A) "when" the signal is actually decrypted as in is it done before it is reaching your box or after? or B) is there any possible way for them to know exactly what you were watching or for how long?

Furthermore the article of the DMCA they are alleging these guys are in violation of states:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C § 1201(a)(1)(cited in demand letter)


(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.

(B) The prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to persons who are users of a copyrighted work which is in a particular class of works, if such persons are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title, as determined under subparagraph (C).

(C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A), and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking, the Librarian shall examine —

(i) the availability for use of copyrighted works;

(ii) the availability for use of works for nonprofit archival, preservation, and educational purposes;

(iii) the impact that the prohibition on the circumvention of technological measures applied to copyrighted works has on criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research;

(iv) the effect of circumvention of technological measures on the market for or value of copyrighted works; and

(v) such other factors as the Librarian considers appropriate.

(D) The Librarian shall publish any class of copyrighted works for which the Librarian has determined, pursuant to the rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), that noninfringing uses by persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be, adversely affected, and the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to such users with respect to such class of works for the ensuing 3-year period.

(E) Neither the exception under subparagraph (B) from the applicability of the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A), nor any determination made in a rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), may be used as a defense in any action to enforce any provision of this title other than this paragraph.

This is why I say these guys obviously don't know everything 'cause if they did they would realize that the actual paragraph of the DMCA that they should be demanding has been violated is:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C § 1201(a)(2)


(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that —

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or

(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

Now I believe someone (might have been Alex I can't remember) said they can change when they actually file suit but I have to ask you: Why in the hell would you pay them money under a demand letter that stipulates you violated a portion of the DMCA that there is no possible way for them to prove? Now can they prove paragraph (2) (yes they can prove that and sub paragraphs A, B, and C) of course they can. But paragraph (1)....no they CANNOT prove that (nor sub paragraph A, B, C, D, or E). The reason being is that paragraph is stating that circumvention has actually already taken place and been ACHIEVED and they cannot, I don't care how many of you guys tell me they can, I repeat they CANNOT prove that any circumvention of their signal has taken place. Now can they prove that you POSSESSED technology that allows you to circumvent their signal YES THEY CAN. The mere possession of a code could be seen as violation of paragraph (2) sub paragraphs A, B and C but is NOT a violation of paragraph (1) the way it is written.

This is why I say these clowns are not God's and they are not all seeing, all knowing and it would be possible to beat the demand letter if you argued this point.

I'm not even sure you can send a demand letter stating a violation under one clause of a law and turn around and sue under another? That would be a question for an attorney and I'm not an attorney I just know how to read and in reading that and interpreting it those paragraphs mean two very distinct and different violations.

[sodusme]

I would even go so far as to say they are bordering on "mischaracterizing" the law under this demand letter.


http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-the-best-tips-for-legal-letter-drafting.htm


A demand letter that asks for a remedy that the law does not permit, or that mischaracterizes what the law says, can lead to a harassment or extortion claim against the drafter.

The reason I say this is they are citing the purchase of this code as a "violation" of the DMCA paragraph (1). Now again they are citing the WRONG paragraph of the DMCA to have that hold water. The paragraph they are citing pertains to the circumvention having already taken place, which is something they cannot prove. Thus it opens them up to a "harassment or extortion" claim IMO.

[buffy777]

Because you need a broadcasting license in order to sell programming.

Well sod, how would a peep buying his service know that he didn't? you see where i'm looking, peeps would be unaware of that fact he had a license, and your post are right on as I can see. (The one above mine)

[jeldf]

I would even go so far as to say they are bordering on "mischaracterizing" the law under this demand letter.


http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-the-best-tips-for-legal-letter-drafting.htm



The reason I say this is they are citing the purchase of this code as a "violation" of the DMCA paragraph (1). Now again they are citing the WRONG paragraph of the DMCA to have that hold water. The paragraph they are citing pertains to the circumvention having already taken place, which is something they cannot prove. Thus it opens them up to a "harassment or extortion" claim IMO.

Having said that......it would be interesting to hear from those folks who paid, if they signed off any counter claim with DN. We all know DN's just in this for the $$ but if the lawsuit was wrongly worded, could one go after them? I would think most judges would not like to be tied to a wrongful decision. IMO

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

If you can prove things such as A) "when" the signal is actually decrypted as in is it done before it is reaching your box or after? or B) is there any possible way for them to know exactly what you were watching or for how long?


I do not think they need to show what you were watching and for how long nor even prove when the signal is actually decrypted with undeniable proof. Circumstantial works.


Furthermore the article of the DMCA they are alleging these guys are in violation of states:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C § 1201(a)(1)(cited in demand letter)



This is why I say these guys obviously don't know everything 'cause if they did they would realize that the actual paragraph of the DMCA that they should be demanding has been violated is:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C § 1201(a)(2)


I don't see a problem with alleging the wrongful conduct as being 1201(a)(1). I think 1201(b)(2) would be more directed to someone dealing/selling and for an end user I think 1201(a))(1) fits more.



Now I believe someone (might have been Alex I can't remember) said they can change when they actually file suit but I have to ask you: Why in the hell would you pay them money under a demand letter that stipulates you violated a portion of the DMCA that there is no possible way for them to prove? Now can they prove paragraph (2) (yes they can prove that and sub paragraphs A, B, and C) of course they can. But paragraph (1)....no they CANNOT prove that (nor sub paragraph A, B, C, D, or E). The reason being is that paragraph is stating that circumvention has actually already taken place and been ACHIEVED and they cannot, I don't care how many of you guys tell me they can, I repeat they CANNOT prove that any circumvention of their signal has taken place. Now can they prove that you POSSESSED technology that allows you to circumvent their signal YES THEY CAN. The mere possession of a code could be seen as violation of paragraph (2) sub paragraphs A, B and C but is NOT a violation of paragraph (1) the way it is written.

This is why I say these clowns are not God's and they are not all seeing, all knowing and it would be possible to beat the demand letter if you argued this point.

I'm not even sure you can send a demand letter stating a violation under one clause of a law and turn around and sue under another? That would be a question for an attorney and I'm not an attorney I just know how to read and in reading that and interpreting it those paragraphs mean two very distinct and different violations.


In law you can make an amended complaint. As far as you can't prove 1201(a)(1) your basing that there is a requirement to prove that the circumvention has taken place with concrete evidence showing you actually did it like you where there and observed it.


I am not so sure that requirement is necessarily in a civil complaint as the requirement because the legal standard is the preponderance of the evidence. If a court feels its more probable than not the defendant circumvented that the burden was met. The court will look at the circumstantial evidence whether its the subscription to the service ( IKS ) the equipment defendant has ( if they know ) any posts on sites that could suggest the defendant had engaged in the activity, basically what evidence they have and make a determination as guilt or not.


I think it could go either way but you suggest it can't because they can't prove you actually circumvented the signal. I say that I don't believe they need to prove it the way your suggesting in civil litigation.




GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I would even go so far as to say they are bordering on "mischaracterizing" the law under this demand letter.


http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-the-best-tips-for-legal-letter-drafting.htm



The reason I say this is they are citing the purchase of this code as a "violation" of the DMCA paragraph (1). Now again they are citing the WRONG paragraph of the DMCA to have that hold water. The paragraph they are citing pertains to the circumvention having already taken place, which is something they cannot prove. Thus it opens them up to a "harassment or extortion" claim IMO.


Yes the allege you circumvented because you bought a subscription to a service that has only one purpose and that is to allow someone to circumvent their signal. They allege you used a sat receiver along obtaining the control words from the server to descramble their protected copyrighted programming.


I don't know if that is enough but I would not say its not as some fact. It is strong. People just don't pay for a subscription to obtain control words that will allow you to circumvent with complete innocence that they didn't do it. I think its more reasonable to think you did and if they have more evidence like you bought a receiver or said something incriminating you can a have problem without them needing to prove you actually did it. If it more probable that works.




GS2

[Nostradamus]

I think that is the main reason for them keeping it in civil court rather than having people charged under the criminal code. They just have to tilt the scales in their favor to win. They really...

[sodusme]

But you're missing the main point here: The whole premise of the demand letter has no merit as its citing a paragraph of the DMCA and is for lack of a better word "miscategorizing" or "misrepresenting" what that law actually states. That paragraph of the DMCA is somewhat ambiguous in its wording in that it doesn't say much that pertains to an end user or a dealer but it "implies" that circumvention has already taken place. Therefore I stand by my reasoning in why on earth would you pay someone money they are demanding when they are demanding that money under what appears to me to be false pretenses? That alone should be enough to get the entire issue dismissed.

In order for the demand letter to be true and factual they would have to prove that you circumvented the signal with IMO first hand evidence not "circumstantial". Now like you said I realize that burden of proof is only 51% in civil proceedings but that leaves wriggle room if you are on top of your game.

Case in point: The guy that bought codes for someone else in his family. Its possible he doesn't even have the necessary equipment needed i.e. receiver, dish, dongle, so forth to circumvent their signal. But because he purchased said codes he is lumped in with the "Because you purchased you are automatically a guilty" group.

Another case in point: Say you bought a code and happened to get one of the "stolen" ones and it never worked in the first place? Or a code that was turned off by mistake. So you are now guilty because you "purchased" something not because you "used" it? There in lies the problem I have with these demand letters as they are stating you "used" the code when in fact as I've been saying they cannot prove that.

In other words you are issuing demand letters stating that the codes were "purchased" and that is a violation but yet your DMCA clause on the demand letters is stating they were "used" and that is the violation. So which is it DN? Were they used or purchased (or both) and which is the actual violation that you are citing occurred and which is the violation you are seeking recompense for?

[Grave Digger]

Problem is that it's all based on variables.......Sod would be willing lose it all to prove that he could win in court and some people won't go that far. Looks like a simple personnel choice to me. It looks like people are just expressing there opinions as to what they would do and not trying to make you do it. Doesn't make either right or wrong.

no sod would not be willing to lose it all, im sure his opinions would be much different if he himself received a letter.....sure its easy to tell other people to "roll the dice" and fight it when you yourself have nothing to lose :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Grave Digger]

If you can prove things such as A) "when" the signal is actually decrypted as in is it done before it is reaching your box or after? or B) is there any possible way for them to know exactly what you were watching or for how long?



none of this matters a damn, all they need to prove is INTENT and thats all, and buying a code proves intent, case closed, im sure your a wise man SOD but your talking out of your rear end here, what you are saying might be relevant for a criminal case, but not a cival case

[sodusme]

no sod would not be willing to lose it all, im sure his opinions would be much different if he himself received a letter.....sure its easy to tell other people to "roll the dice" and fight it when you yourself have nothing to lose :rolleyes::rolleyes:

LOL I have plenty to lose and trust me that wouldn't change my stance. This is not an "act" that I portray on these forums believe me I'm just as vocal in real life as I make myself out to be here. I don't take any guff in real life with companies. If I do business with you and you want to accuse me of wrong doing you better have some ironclad evidence or I'll make you look like a fool. I've done it before with a couple companies and will continue to do it.

Of course its easy to tell people to "pay up" when you yourself have something to gain from it. :rolleyes:

[Grave Digger]

exactly, buyingt a code is enough proof for a civil case

[Grave Digger]

LOL I have plenty to lose and trust me that wouldn't change my stance. This is not an "act" that I portray on these forums believe me I'm just as vocal in real life as I make myself out to be here. I don't take any guff in real life with companies. If I do business with you and you want to accuse me of wrong doing you better have some ironclad evidence or I'll make you look like a fool. I've done it before with a couple companies and will continue to do it.

Of course its easy to tell people to "pay up" when you yourself have something to gain from it. :rolleyes:


i dont care what you do in real life or online, if you received a letter and went to court you would lose, plain and simple, no way you would ever beat DN lawyers in court, sorry its not going to happen, DN lawyers would make you look like a fool in a court room, all they need to do is prove intent and tip the scale slightly in their favor, and proving somebody purchased a code does just that

[sodusme]

i dont care what you do in real life or online, if you received a letter and went to court you would lose, plain and simple, no way you would ever beat DN lawyers in court, sorry its not going to happen

I think you should change your name to "Grave Dug" since the glass is always half empty with you.

[sodusme]

none of this matters a damn, all they need to prove is INTENT and thats all, and buying a code proves intent, case closed, im sure your a wise man SOD but your talking out of your rear end here, what you are saying might be relevant for a criminal case, but not a cival case

Better do some more reading:


www.ladas.com/NII/CopyrightInfringement.html


Copyright infringement is determined without regard to the intent or the state of mind of the infringer


Liability for direct infringement is, therefore, generally determined without regard to the intent of the infringer.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

But you're missing the main point here: The whole premise of the demand letter has no merit as its citing a paragraph of the DMCA and is for lack of a better word "miscategorizing" or "misrepresenting" what that law actually states. That paragraph of the DMCA is somewhat ambiguous in its wording in that it doesn't say much that pertains to an end user or a dealer but it "implies" that circumvention has already taken place. Therefore I stand by my reasoning in why on earth would you pay someone money they are demanding when they are demanding that money under what appears to me to be false pretenses? That alone should be enough to get the entire issue dismissed.

In order for the demand letter to be true and factual they would have to prove that you circumvented the signal with IMO first hand evidence not "circumstantial". Now like you said I realize that burden of proof is only 51% in civil proceedings but that leaves wriggle room if you are on top of your game.

Case in point: The guy that bought codes for someone else in his family. Its possible he doesn't even have the necessary equipment needed i.e. receiver, dish, dongle, so forth to circumvent their signal. But because he purchased said codes he is lumped in with the "Because you purchased you are automatically a guilty" group.

Another case in point: Say you bought a code and happened to get one of the "stolen" ones and it never worked in the first place? Or a code that was turned off by mistake. So you are now guilty because you "purchased" something not because you "used" it? There in lies the problem I have with these demand letters as they are stating you "used" the code when in fact as I've been saying they cannot prove that.

In other words you are issuing demand letters stating that the codes were "purchased" and that is a violation but yet your DMCA clause on the demand letters is stating they were "used" and that is the violation. So which is it DN? Were they used or purchased (or both) and which is the actual violation that you are citing occurred and which is the violation you are seeking recompense for?


If you think the demand letter has no merit than you can ignore it but that will have no effect on a complaint filled in court after if it is. Its almost like your saying you can argue a defense in court with saying the demand letter was misrepresented when the only thing will matter is what the complaint alleges and the merit of it not the demand letter.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

i dont care what you do in real life or online, if you received a letter and went to court you would lose, plain and simple, no way you would ever beat DN lawyers in court, sorry its not going to happen, DN lawyers would make you look like a fool in a court room, all they need to do is prove intent and tip the scale slightly in their favor, and proving somebody purchased a code does just that



I don't think you can make a blanket statement like that. I feel any defendant will have an uphill battle with the odds against them but can't say they could not be successful. You just never know in court. A real good lawyer, sympathetic judge you just don't know, or some technical error by the plaintiff.



GS2

[Anubis]

I don't think you can make a blanket statement like that. I feel any defendant will have an uphill battle with the odds against them but can't say they could not be successful. You just never know in court. A real good lawyer, sympathetic judge you just don't know, or some technical error by the plaintiff.


GS2


Hmmm, Sounds like rolling the dice.

[Russian Rocket]

What are they going to do after they run out of rat resellers to squeeze? Can they target SK200 sellers? Can the SK200 be used to get true unencrypted FTA HD programming? I think it's just a device capable of understanding HD signals (from any satellite) is it not?

[Hannibalector]

I do not think they need to show what you were watching and for how long nor even prove when the signal is actually decrypted with undeniable proof. Circumstantial works.




I don't see a problem with alleging the wrongful conduct as being 1201(a)(1). I think 1201(b)(2) would be more directed to someone dealing/selling and for an end user I think 1201(a))(1) fits more.





In law you can make an amended complaint. As far as you can't prove 1201(a)(1) your basing that there is a requirement to prove that the circumvention has taken place with concrete evidence showing you actually did it like you where there and observed it.


I am not so sure that requirement is necessarily in a civil complaint as the requirement because the legal standard is the preponderance of the evidence. If a court feels its more probable than not the defendant circumvented that the burden was met. The court will look at the circumstantial evidence whether its the subscription to the service ( IKS ) the equipment defendant has ( if they know ) any posts on sites that could suggest the defendant had engaged in the activity, basically what evidence they have and make a determination as guilt or not.


I think it could go either way but you suggest it can't because they can't prove you actually circumvented the signal. I say that I don't believe they need to prove it the way your suggesting in civil litigation.




GS2

if they're alleging you did circumvent and claiming it they had better prove it enough to hit at least that 51%, I'm sure all kinds of false and baseless claims and accusations can be made in civil court but you better be able to prove them

[Hannibalector]

What are they going to do after they run out of rat resellers to squeeze? Can they target SK200 sellers? Can the SK200 be used to get true unencrypted FTA HD programming? I think it's just a device capable of understanding HD signals (from any satellite) is it not?

the sk200 is a modulator or demodulator not a decrypter read up on QPSK and 8PSK

[sodusme]

OK look at the actual court cases they have brought against the guys they have brought? Every single one of them alleges wrong doing or a violation under section 1201(a)(1) of the DMCA. If the demand...

[Hannibalector]

I read this and the entire article

A demand letter that asks for a remedy that the law does not permit, or that mischaracterizes what the law says, can lead to a harassment or extortion claim against the drafter.

wouldn't it be interesting if some of the people that have received these letters and have endured pain and suffering due to the extortion aspect of this all got together or had the tools at least drafted from one single attorney to have a demand letter of there own drafted and fired back towards the drafters of the original letters, fight fire with fire, since they are citing the DMCA and they are citing the wrong application of the DMCA, I would think they also have a right to send a demand letter of there own to cease further correspondence or the application of the demand letters will result

[buffy777]

I read this and the entire article


wouldn't it be interesting if some of the people that have received these letters and have endured pain and suffering due to the extortion aspect of this all got together or had the tools at least drafted from one single attorney to have a demand letter of there own drafted and fired back towards the drafters of the original letters, fight fire with fire, since they are citing the DMCA and they are citing the wrong application of the DMCA, I would think they also have a right to send a demand letter of there own to cease further correspondence or the application of the demand letters will resultThat would be a great idea, does anyone know a good attorney who could do this? I don't have a letter, but would contribute to a fund to put these leaches down and out of the extortion business, and maybe a good return.

[sodusme]

I read this and the entire article


wouldn't it be interesting if some of the people that have received these letters and have endured pain and suffering due to the extortion aspect of this all got together or had the tools at least drafted from one single attorney to have a demand letter of there own drafted and fired back towards the drafters of the original letters, fight fire with fire, since they are citing the DMCA and they are citing the wrong application of the DMCA, I would think they also have a right to send a demand letter of there own to cease further correspondence or the application of the demand letters will result

Oh its definitely "miscategorizing" or "misrepresenting" the section 1201 (a)(1). There is no way it can't be. This is what I have been trying to say for months if not a year now is how in the hell did they get a ruling on this in the FIRST place? Obviously like I've said some judge that had no idea what IKS is, how it was used, or anything about it made a ruling on this.

Here is another interesting point Hanni read the lawsuit complaints and you'll notice they are riddled with "how IKS works" b.s. statements. When in actuality they aren't suing you for "using" the code they are suing you for "possession" of the code as that is ALL they can prove. But the actual lawsuit is written up as to say they have already proven "actual" usage and that its a given that you used the code.

So here it is in a nutshell: Send out a few thousand demand letters that demand recompense for "purchasing" and/or "possessing" a code that is used in the circumvention of their signal. Follow that up with a lawsuit that switches gears and now demands payment based on "actual" circumvention taking place. Write up the lawsuit so that it reads as if the party was caught actively engaging in satellite piracy and totally ignore the fact that ALL you have for evidence is some codes being purchased. Cite the wrong section of the DMCA for the demand letter 'cause you know that once you get them into court you can prove the proper section for the simple fact they will incriminate themselves or the judge will rule on "past precedence" or the mere fact that they are in court will imply guilt. Pretty slick if you ask me but I can tell you this and the nay sayers can say what they want but they wouldn't get one God d*mn nickel from me. I'd fight that tooth and nail.

[Nostradamus]

I read this and the entire article


wouldn't it be interesting if some of the people that have received these letters and have endured pain and suffering due to the extortion aspect of this all got together or had the tools at least drafted from one single attorney to have a demand letter of there own drafted and fired back towards the drafters of the original letters, fight fire with fire, since they are citing the DMCA and they are citing the wrong application of the DMCA, I would think they also have a right to send a demand letter of there own to cease further correspondence or the application of the demand letters will result

is there an echo in here? :)

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

if they're alleging you did circumvent and claiming it they had better prove it enough to hit at least that 51%, I'm sure all kinds of false and baseless claims and accusations can be made in civil court but you better be able to prove them



The proof is the circumstantial evidence. The proof is whether the evidence makes it more probable than not.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Hmmm, Sounds like rolling the dice.


It is rolling the dice. The odds are against the defendant in my opinion.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Its your opinion it has no merit. They will be arguing based on the complaint filled not the demand letter. The demand letter basically offers you a settlement before court an option you can choose...

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I read this and the entire article


wouldn't it be interesting if some of the people that have received these letters and have endured pain and suffering due to the extortion aspect of this all got together or had the tools at least drafted from one single attorney to have a demand letter of there own drafted and fired back towards the drafters of the original letters, fight fire with fire, since they are citing the DMCA and they are citing the wrong application of the DMCA, I would think they also have a right to send a demand letter of there own to cease further correspondence or the application of the demand letters will result


How did extortion take place with sending a demand letter. Its a normal practice in civil litigation. Which court said they were citing the wrong application. The application looks fine to me but good luck to anyone who thinks they are going to win citing extortion because they think the plaintiffs should have chosen a different claim under the DMCA.



GS2

[Nostradamus]

Its your opinion it has no merit. They will be arguing based on the complaint filled not the demand letter. The demand letter basically offers you a settlement before court an option you can choose or not choose. The demand letter is not filled in court.





You can try to sue alleging it was extortion but that was tried before with Dave demand letters and the court ruled their demand letters were not extortion. Their allege the circumvention in 1201(a) because of the purchase to a service that only serves as a way to circumvent. The court can take that as reasonable inference or more probable than not that you did circumvent. People are convicted of murder with circumstantial evidence in criminal court without evidence showing the person actually committed the murder.










What good defens are you going to mount with knowing how IKS really works. Do you think the Plaintiffs don't know how IKS actually works ? Do you think their experts who testify if need be. don't know how it actually works. ?




GS2

I think the extortion comes into play where they use the strong arm tactic of if you do not pay us $3500 now we will take you to court and get a lot more instead

[surfinisfun]

GS2, you are spending a lot of time arguing facts, most seem to suggest to fold the tent if you have received a letter. Now I'm not saying anyone should or should not try but i know the law is very black and white in written anything, criminal or civil.

If the party creating these demand letters screw it up in any way it leaves them vulnerable for a viable defense and then subject to being tossed out.

That is a fact, we've all seen it a thousand times.

[alex70olds]

GS2, you are spending a lot of time arguing facts, most seem to suggest to fold the tent if you have received a letter. Now I'm not saying anyone should or should not try but i know the law is very black and white in written anything, criminal or civil.

If the party creating these demand letters screw it up in any way it leaves them vulnerable for a viable defense and then subject to being tossed out.

That is a fact, we've all seen it a thousand times.

Please site a case where these plaintiffs have had a cas thrown out where an enduser is the defendant. The plaintiffs have dismissed 5 cases, but have never had one thrown out, dismissed or even lost. That said, the number of cases filed appears to be miniscule compared to the number of demand letters filed. Of the cases filed, there is no possible way to beat them.I have no idea if they have the same evidence against all that got demand letters.

[surfinisfun]

Please site a case where these plaintiffs have had a cas thrown out where an enduser is the defendant. The plaintiffs have dismissed 5 cases, but have never had one thrown out, dismissed or even lost. That said, the number of cases filed appears to be miniscule compared to the number of demand letters filed. Of the cases filed, there is no possible way to beat them.I have no idea if they have the same evidence against all that got demand letters.

Alex,

I wasn't talking about these cases but the law in general. It takes next to nothing, and i mean the smallest technicality to have a case dismissed.

Go ahead tell me i'm wrong.

[alex70olds]

Alex,

I wasn't talking about these cases but the law in general. It takes next to nothing, and i mean the smallest technicality to have a case dismissed.

Go ahead tell me i'm wrong.

Yes, in civil court it is different. Plaintiffs are almost always afforded a chance to file an amended complaint etc.

[goadus]

My question is CAN they prove a person actually used the codes. I guess thats the millon dollar question. If they can then the plantiff is really screwed imo. The three counts on my case are 1. Circumventing access control measure, 2. Receiving satellite signals without authorization and 3. Intercepting satellite signals in violation. While doing a little reading on 1201 (a) (1) if it is being done in the name of research it may be exempt. I tell you that it has caused me tremoundous grief and worry about this and I don't know when I will ever recover. This thread has a lot of good points and some not so good but it concerns a lot of folks.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I think the extortion comes into play where they use the strong arm tactic of if you do not pay us $3500 now we will take you to court and get a lot more instead


That is what a typical demand letter says. I just sent out a demand letter as done before as a plaintiff with similar language. Myself I rather skip the demand letter but courts prefer that you send one.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

GS2, you are spending a lot of time arguing facts, most seem to suggest to fold the tent if you have received a letter. Now I'm not saying anyone should or should not try but i know the law is very black and white in written anything, criminal or civil.

If the party creating these demand letters screw it up in any way it leaves them vulnerable for a viable defense and then subject to being tossed out.

That is a fact, we've all seen it a thousand times.


Actually I just recently started to re post on this thread but what facts am I arguing on. ? Its not a fact that the demand letter is extortion nor is it a fact the plaintiff quoted the wrong section in the DMCA. If it was a fact I would not debate it.


That is the problem. You get someone who says they quoted the wrong section or the demand letter is extortion than some of you adopt that as fact. The real fact is that the demand letters that Dave sent out were challenged in court and the court ruled there was no extortion at all. These letters are basically the same. What is the point in believing something that probably at least as I see it is not true.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

My question is CAN they prove a person actually used the codes. I guess thats the millon dollar question. If they can then the plantiff is really screwed imo. The three counts on my case are 1. Circumventing access control measure, 2. Receiving satellite signals without authorization and 3. Intercepting satellite signals in violation. While doing a little reading on 1201 (a) (1) if it is being done in the name of research it may be exempt. I tell you that it has caused me tremoundous grief and worry about this and I don't know when I will ever recover. This thread has a lot of good points and some not so good but it concerns a lot of folks.


The question is do they have to prove that. I don't think they do in a Civil proceeding. I think they have to prove that it is probable than not.


I know it can cause a lot of grief and worry. You should speak to a lawyer.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I think it would be helpful if people read this decision I attached regarding Dave demand letters being extortion, fraud, misrepresentation. Similar issues were addressed. The court ruled in favor of Dave two times. I would like to say the opposite but it did not happen.




GS2

[surfinisfun]

GS2,

I have been around a while and recall your fight with dave and it has no doubt been financially and possibly more important, emotionally draining but you are lumping both in as though they are the same.

They are not.

[ftastudent2]

Perhaps if you are in the south it would be better to only do north and if in north only do south. Carefully select your provider. Don,t Sh*t in your own backyard!

[dishuser]

Perhaps if you are in the south it would be better to only do north and if in north only do south. Carefully select your provider. Don,t Sh*t in your own backyard!

perhaps you better read the law about that