demanding letter from dish

[mudflap]

Has anyone had any success negotiating with the lawyers yet

[mudflap]

I did so does it mean I have to pay..

[alex70olds]

I would say consult a lawyer, but just my layman opinion.

For those keeping a score at home.

99 - Total Enduser cases filed in US Federal Court
72 - Dark Angel cases
27- W\/ff cases

Dark Angel
34 - Settled with plaintiff, $10K for non-confidential agreements.
31 - Default Judgment, usually $10K
4 - Dismissed
2 - Summary Judgment
1 - Active

W\/ff
7 - Settled
5 - Default Judgment
3 - Dismissed
0 - Summary Judgment
11 - Active
1 - Awarded $10K by Bankruptcy Court

3200 - Approximate number of NFPS codes sold by w\/ff
3600 - Approximate number of Rocket codes sold by w\/ff.

[sodusme]

So "dismissed" could mean anything basically? From the the defendant "won" on having the allegations dismissed to a ruling by the judge to throw it out even? Is that correct? So if that is the case than there is hope. All be it slim but there is hope. :innocent:

[sodusme]

About a 3% chance based on current cases.If most of the perps don't have the money to pay DN, thet vertainly won't have the money to pay DN AND thier laywers when they lose.

My thinking is of the guy who's on disability or SSI, doesn't own a car, doesn't own a motorcycle, doesn't own a boat, doesn't own a home and doesn't have a 401K. He shows up in court and represents himself. Who cares if he loses? I mean really what are they are going to do at that point? There is nothing to "seize" after the judgment. You have to have some kind of assets to make a judgment collection against. I'm sure there are people that fit into that category right here on this very forum.

[DualTest]

My thinking is of the guy who's on disability or SSI, doesn't own a car, doesn't own a motorcycle, doesn't own a boat, doesn't own a home and doesn't have a 401K. He shows up in court and represents himself. Who cares if he loses? I mean really what are they are going to do at that point? There is nothing to "seize" after the judgment. You have to have some kind of assets to make a judgment collection against. I'm sure there are people that fit into that category right here on this very forum.

And those people, I bet, aren't getting letters.

[Grave Digger]

I mean really what are they are going to do at that point? There is nothing to "seize" after the judgment.

we already discussed this in the other thread,

if they have no assets they freeze your bank account, as soon as money/cheques/direct deposits go into the account they are immediately withdrawn and not available to you, and yes same goes for government issued deposits

[alex70olds]

They don't really go after too many. But if you piss them off, all bets are off.

Here is a rare example.
19970
19971
19972
19969
19968

[alex70olds]

Last 2, think I got them in the correct order

19974
19973

[sodusme]

we already discussed this in the other thread,

if they have no assets they freeze your bank account, as soon as money/cheques/direct deposits go into the account they are immediately withdrawn and not available to you, and yes same goes for government issued deposits

No you are still saying this same thing and it is not true. Please read the below article. Its from a .GOV site so I'm sure they know what they are speaking of. They cannot seize deposits that go on a debit card and some states have varying parameters on what they allow you to "hide" from a judgment seizure. Its not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. They are not God's and cannot do anything they please.


http://www.consumerfinance.gov/askcfpb/1157/can-creditor-garnish-my-social-security-benefits-pay-debt.html


Some states provide greater protection than the federal law for benefits payments that are in your bank account. This means that, in some states, the amount your bank will automatically protect from garnishment is higher than under the federal rule.


Another way to protect greater amounts of exempt federal benefits from garnishment is to use the Direct Express card. Direct Express is a prepaid debit card on which federal payments, including Social Security, SSI, and VA benefits, can be deposited. Benefits paid this way cannot be frozen or garnished unless they fit the exceptions under federal law – for example, if you owe child support or alimony.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

My thinking is of the guy who's on disability or SSI, doesn't own a car, doesn't own a motorcycle, doesn't own a boat, doesn't own a home and doesn't have a 401K. He shows up in court and represents himself. Who cares if he loses? I mean really what are they are going to do at that point? There is nothing to "seize" after the judgment. You have to have some kind of assets to make a judgment collection against. I'm sure there are people that fit into that category right here on this very forum.



They can pursue collection on a judgment for quite sometime, years, not sure if this is by state but in California is 10 years, so if you have no assets now and somewhere later you do, you can still be exposed for collection on the judgment



GS2

[pbmckenz]

so what is the Statute of limitations on this

[Nostradamus]

I believe that varies by state to state, another reason to seek legal counsel

[sodusme]

They can pursue collection on a judgment for quite sometime, years, not sure if this is by state but in California is 10 years, so if you have no assets now and somewhere later you do, you can still be exposed for collection on the judgment



GS2

That makes sense. But the guy who was maybe a Vietnam Vet and had a leg blown off in the war and now gets disability loaded onto a debit card and lives in a state that happens to protect people like him from judgment settlements more heavily than the government mandates isn't in a lot of jeopardy of losing much. Especially if for example he rents, and maybe rides public transportation around town. He isn't likely to go out and buy a motorcycle, he isn't likely to go out and buy a speed boat, he isn't likely to go out and buy an ATV or other recreational vehicle, and he probably doesn't own a 401K or other retirement package.

I understand what you're saying but its not as easy as "They will take your house, your car, your motorcycle, your boat, your first born, your wife" or any of that like some of these other guys are saying. People need to assess their own financial situation and if you have nothing to lose then I say fight it. Why not? Its D/N here folks collecting for "stolen" TV they have to follow the rules like everyone else does when collecting a debt. They cannot take any more of any less than any other debtor that may try to collect against you. Unless that debtor happens to be the U.S. government and they WILL get their money. But again talk to an attorney to make certain that is the road you want to travel.

[RG6A]

New P$ service out. Requirements are fta box with serial port, pc with Win7, and either be permanently disabled to work or otherwise be judgment proof.

[mudflap]

I just want to know if anyone has payed the 3500 and if it's that easy...I got the money but I'm just trying to fine out what to expect after I pay...

[sodusme]

I just want to know if anyone has payed the 3500 and if it's that easy...I got the money but I'm just trying to fine out what to expect after I pay...

At a minimum I would have them "release" you from any and all future obligations. Just as they want you to sign a bleeding heart letter stating you were naughty and will not do this again you can have them do the same. Have them draft up a letter stating that although you are not admitting "guilt" you are paying the sum they are asking and in return you want a guarantee that this amount constitutes payment in full against any and all future allegations should they arise. Being bound of course by your agreement they will have you draft up so they know that no new offenses are perpetrated by you. The reason I would have them agree to this is say you purchased from multiple PS sellers. You have a letter now for receiving codes from seller ABC you don't want a letter in 6 months for receiving codes from seller XYZ.

[abouttosnap]

New P$ service out. Requirements are fta box with serial port, pc with Win7, and either be permanently disabled to work or otherwise be judgment proof.

Does that have to be a legal copy or will a copy one may find in a krackerjacks box work. :D

[clarkBENT]

so what is the Statute of limitations on this

They are suing in US Federal Court.

17 USC § 1201 (Circumventing an Access Control Measure): three year statute of limitation (17 USC § 507(b).)
47 USC § 605 (Receiving Satellite Signals without Authorization): one year statute of limitation (DirectTV v. Webb, 545 F.3d 837, 847-48 (9th Cir. 2008).)
18 USC §§ 2511 and 2520 (Intercepting Satellite Signals): two year statutes of limitation (18 USC § 2520(e).)

[1boxman]

I think most have a catch 22 decision to make ...and nagra knows it... 1 -Nothing to loose..fight it..but no cash to fight it...or 2-scrape up enough cash and be done with it .

In the case with no cash to fight it ...even with some free legal aid of sort..how far would you get .

Sucks either way .

[clarkBENT]

Try the $59.00 defense package:


http://www.piratecardblues.com/

I am curious to know how well it plays. Please report back.



I think most have a catch 22 decision to make ...and nagra knows it... 1 -Nothing to loose..fight it..but no cash to fight it...or 2-scrape up enough cash and be done with it .

In the case with no cash to fight it ...even with some free legal aid of sort..how far would you get .

Sucks either way .

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

To be honest I don't think they are going to spend much money and time trying to collect on an end user but the problem is you don't really know and you don't know when they will try to make an...

[Grave Digger]

so what is the Statute of limitations on this

most court orders/judgements are good for at least seven years,

it is pretty near impossible to go seven years without a bank account, without any assets, and without a traceable income, unless your a drug dealer or a prostitute, or begging on a street corner and renting an apartment,

the only way to get around a judgement is if you have no assets in your name for this entire period of time, AND your income is 100% cash and not traceable,

if it was easy to get around a court judgement, there would be no reason to have courts of law,

[sodusme]

most court orders/judgements are good for at least seven years,

it is pretty near impossible to go seven years without a bank account, without any assets, and without a traceable income, unless your a drug dealer or a prostitute, or begging on a street corner and renting an apartment,

the only way to get around a judgement is if you have no assets in your name for this entire period of time, AND your income is 100% cash and not traceable,

if it was easy to get around a court judgement, there would be no reason to have courts of law,

Well actually courts of law aren't set up to help you "collect" once you get your judgement. Any judge will tell you that. They are there to decide and rule on the law. That is why we have courts. Its up to you the plaintiff to collect once the judgement is handed down. Is the "collection" of recompence part of the judgement? Not really if you think about it they are deciding on the letter of the law not how much, where and when you should pay. That is a byproduct of the courts decision on whether you committed wrong doing and are held liable for such wrong doing. Now will they decide on that type of matter? Of course they will but again its not the primary reason that a court of law exists.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Well actually courts of law aren't set up to help you "collect" once you get your judgement. Any judge will tell you that. They are there to decide and rule on the law. That is why we have courts. Its up to you the plaintiff to collect once the judgement is handed down. Is the "collection" of recompence part of the judgement? Not really if you think about it they are deciding on the letter of the law not how much, where and when you should pay. That is a byproduct of the courts decision on whether you committed wrong doing and are held liable for such wrong doing. Now will they decide on that type of matter? Of course they will but again its not the primary reason that a court of law exists.


Well they do help in some ways. Without looking up every State or Province for Jurisdiction court rules generally you can call someone to appear in court to be examined on financial and or to produce a statement of assets for a judgment you may have. You can have a hearing for this. The rules might vary depending on the jurisdiction.



GS2

[sodusme]

Well they do help in some ways. Without looking up every State or Province for Jurisdiction court rules generally you can call someone to appear in court to be examined on financial and or to produce a statement of assets for a judgment you may have. You can have a hearing for this. The rules might vary depending on the jurisdiction.



GS2

Sure but if that individual has no assets or finances to speak of than what? The court can levy that John Doe make payment in X amount of days but only if John Doe has the means to make said payment.

I guess what I'm saying is the court has done its job when it says "Mr. John Doe it is hear by ordered that you pay ABC Co. the sum of X amount of dollars". From then on its on you the plaintiff to actually collect. The court will step in as you said and confirm or deny that the individual actually has the means to pay the judgement or they will even make a ruling that the defendant has X amount of days to pay the judgement if he in fact has the means. But they cannot and will not "go after" an individual to make them pay.

Courts were set up to rule on wrong doing and pass down fines and fees and so forth. They weren't set up to be a collection agency after they have made their ruling.

[RG6A]

A collection agency can't get blood from a stone but they sure can make one's life a living hell.

[NoName]

I just want to know if anyone has payed the 3500 and if it's that easy...I got the money but I'm just trying to fine out what to expect after I pay...

you pay the 3500 and they go away.

[NoName]

agree with sodusme and disagree with gunsmoke. If a person is found guilty and ordered to pay back restitution/penalties for sat piracy, could the plaintiffs (nag and their lawyers) file a motion to attach/garnish?? absolutely. But those motions are not automatic. In situations when default judgments are entered then motions to attach/garnish are basically guaranteed because the defendant isn't there to argue their case.

I have sat through many civil and criminal proceedings and I've heard hearings on motions to attach/garnish. And from my experiences, the judge often will try to get both sides to "work it out". I've found that judges often have empathy for a person's financial situation regardless of their guilt. But the crimes that they have been found guilty of, their health, criminal/civil history and so many other factors CAN come into play. This is not a 1 plus 1 equals 2 type of thing.

After a defendant is found guilty, the plaintiff makes a motion to attach/garnish. If the defendant has a skilled attorney, they will petition to the court every reason why a garnishment or attachment would cause an excessive burden and harm on the defendant. So the example of the poor guy on limited to no income. There are NO hard and fast rules which says that his income will be garnished REGARDLESS. There are no hard and fast rules that says every penny that goes to his account will automatically be taken. It is not that black and white. There are different courts, different judges and so many other variables in place. It's a case by case basis. I am by no means a legal expert but I have sat in on several hearings on these types of issues.


Sure but if that individual has no assets or finances to speak of than what? The court can levy that John Doe make payment in X amount of days but only if John Doe has the means to make said payment.

I guess what I'm saying is the court has done its job when it says "Mr. John Doe it is hear by ordered that you pay ABC Co. the sum of X amount of dollars". From then on its on you the plaintiff to actually collect. The court will step in as you said and confirm or deny that the individual actually has the means to pay the judgement or they will even make a ruling that the defendant has X amount of days to pay the judgement if he in fact has the means. But they cannot and will not "go after" an individual to make them pay.

Courts were set up to rule on wrong doing and pass down fines and fees and so forth. They weren't set up to be a collection agency after they have made their ruling.

[RG6A]

If the defendant has a skilled attorney, they will petition to the court every reason why a garnishment or attachment would cause an excessive burden and harm on the defendant

HUH???? The guy already defaulted because he had no attorney. Where is the money coming from to now hire an attorney to fight the garnishment????????

[NoName]

HUH???? The guy already defaulted because he had no attorney. Where is the money coming from to now hire an attorney to fight the garnishment????????

I am speaking in general terms.

Regarding the specific scenario presented here.
If you are found guilty and ordered to pay. There is no guarantee that your wages or bank accounts will be garnished. the courts take many things into account one of which is a person's current financial circumstances.

[alex70olds]

I am speaking in general terms.

Regarding the specific scenario presented here.
If you are found guilty and ordered to pay. There is no guarantee that your wages or bank accounts will be garnished. the courts take many things into account one of which is a person's current financial circumstances.

There is no such thing as guilty in civil court.

[sodusme]

There is no such thing as guilty in civil court.

I think "liable" is the correct term right? I might even be wrong on that I don't know for sure?

[tbird686]

are these letters in america? if people in canada are getting them is the price of the fine the same? 3500?

[sodusme]

are these letters in america? if people in canada are getting them is the price of the fine the same? 3500?

As far as I have read on the forums no end user in Canada has gotten a letter. The reason I suspect is that DN must bring suit against you in the proper "venue" which means they must sue you in a court that is easily accessible to you. That would be a court system where you work or live near. They cannot make you come to them. If they were to sue a Canadian user they must bring the suit again in a proper "venue" which would mean that their attorneys would have to fly their happy @sses to Canada to sue you OR they would have to spin the lawsuit off to a local law firm in Canada (giving up a percentage of the proceeds in the process). I wouldn't rule out that they will eventually do this if you naughty Canadians keep pirating their signal but for the time being you are relatively safe. ;)

[Nostradamus]

really I don't think they could go after Cdns because hard for them to claim lost revenue through piracy when it is not something they could legally sell to begin with. However, according to Cdn law it is a criminal offense to have hardware decrypt any signal without proper authorization so I guess about all they could do is turn names and addresses over to the crown prosecutors and let them decide if they wanted to pursue it or not. So it would probably never happen as there would be nothing for DN to gain by doing so and it would probably wind up costing them a fair amount in compiling evidence to do so. Also the fact that it would then be a criminal case and not civil would not make the slam dunk they have on the American side.

Now that is not to say that BEV couldn't go after anybody with a civil suit but since the majority of Cdn leeching signals are grabbing DN rather than 40 channels of CBC and CTV it would almost seem that DN would have to be named as a co-defendant for supplying the signal to begin with LOL

[dishuser]

really I don't think they could go after Cdns because hard for them to claim lost revenue through piracy when it is not something they could legally sell to begin with. However, according to Cdn law it is a criminal offense to have hardware decrypt any signal without proper authorization so I guess about all they could do is turn names and addresses over to the crown prosecutors and let them decide if they wanted to pursue it or not. So it would probably never happen as there would be nothing for DN to gain by doing so and it would probably wind up costing them a fair amount in compiling evidence to do so. Also the fact that it would then be a criminal case and not civil would not make the slam dunk they have on the American side.

Now that is not to say that BEV couldn't go after anybody with a civil suit but since the majority of Cdn leeching signals are grabbing DN rather than 40 channels of CBC and CTV it would almost seem that DN would have to be named as a co-defendant for supplying the signal to begin with LOL
circumventing nagra not dish/bev;)

[Nostradamus]

yeah that would be the thing but then who is doing all the instigating stateside though... is it nagra or dn really? I know they are both named on it but does nagra really care? seems to me if their crap was secure they would be out of a job so they intentionally make faulty code and refer to it as job security LOL

[NoName]

There is no such thing as guilty in civil court.
Take the word guilt out. My point remains the same.

[NoName]

HUH???? The guy already defaulted because he had no attorney. Where is the money coming from to now hire an attorney to fight the garnishment????????
Not having an attorney is not grounds for default. Default is typically failure to appear or having no defense.

[RG6A]

Not having an attorney is not grounds for default. Default is typically failure to appear or having no defense.

No **** sherlock. The peeps here are defaulting because they did'nt respond to their demand letter. If they don't have the money to hire an attorney or the ready cash to pay the $3500 demand, then how are they going to pay for an attorney to fight levies, garnishments, etc. and other things that you mention?

[NoName]

No **** sherlock. The peeps here are defaulting because they did'nt respond to their demand letter. If they don't have the money to hire an attorney or the ready cash to pay the $3500 demand, then how are they going to pay for an attorney to fight levies, garnishments, etc. and other things that you mention?

You said and I quote..."the guy defaulted because he had no attorney" That's not accurate.....

Secondly, if a person doesn't have funds to hire an attorney doesn't mean the sky is falling. I've seen folks in civil proceedings go pro se and strike a reasonable deal. There are plenty of incentives for all parties to work deals out. Do you think a civil court judge wants another case on their docket? Do you think nag wants to continue to pay their law firm over a guy who is constantly dragging out motions and drawing things out. Typically, its in everyone's best interest to work something out. Why do you think their law firm make settlement offers in the first place? Why do you think the law firm takes payment plans. It's in everyone's best interst to work something out that both parties can live with. Doesn't mean it'll be 50/50 but something that both parties can live with.

Once the case is presented to the judge, the judge will encourage both parties to try and work out an agreement. They don't just try and throw the book at people even if they are in the wrong. And the guy who said that they will just attach any funds going into a bank account is misinformed. Could it happen possibly but it depends on circumstances.

[sodusme]

circumventing nagra not dish/bev;)

That's a good point and Nagra is worldwide not just state side or Canadian side? Which leads me back to the proper venue suing platform. Nagra could easily sue folks on both sides of the border but would they sue them on your side of the border when they have to sue in Canada for pirating DN's signal there and vice versa for Bev when they would have to sue folks in the states for pirating Bev?

[dishuser]

That's a good point and Nagra is worldwide not just state side or Canadian side? Which leads me back to the proper venue suing platform. Nagra could easily sue folks on both sides of the border but would they sue them on your side of the border when they have to sue in Canada for pirating DN's signal there and vice versa for Bev when they would have to sue folks in the states for pirating Bev?
they did it with dealers but for a far greater amount(dn/bev $10 million each)
if a lot of canadians are known they just might make an example of a few

[alex70olds]

Take the word guilt out. My point remains the same.

My only point is that someone with this vast experience would know this, very simple basic of litigation.


they did it with dealers but for a far greater amount(dn/bev $10 million each)
if a lot of canadians are known they just might make an example of a few

Time will tell. No PACER north of the border, so it would take longer to be public.

[Bill]

When I received my demand letter from DN I had a friend that was roommate with a Par legal that worked for DN. He is the one that told me to not responed to the letter. I think anyone could send someone a demand letter but does not mean anything until you get a court order to appear. I would think that would be the time to decide to settle before going to court. My advice to anyone is to contact a lawyer for advice and then decide what to do.

[Anubis]

If they aren't going after Canadians then did I misread this? http://www.satfix.net/showthread.php?130664-Another-Mod-Reseller-Bust&p=1004353#post1004353

It may not be end user but it shows they will enter Canada so the possibility is there quite high in my opinion.

[NoName]

[QUOTE=alex70olds;1006950]My only point is that someone with this vast experience would know this, very simple basic of litigation.

My point is some people on here don't have "vast experience" that's why I shared it. What you consider the basics of litigation might be new info to some. After all, these forums are about sharing info among other things.

[sodusme]

they did it with dealers but for a far greater amount(dn/bev $10 million each)
if a lot of canadians are known they just might make an example of a few

Yeah I think that is another reason why. Maybe because its more revenue to sue a dealer 'cause you can sue for a higher amount? Or maybe its because of the DMCA clause for "manufacturing" or "supplying" devices so on and so forth.

Does Canada recognize the DMCA or any part there of? That might be some of the reason too.

[RG6A]

You said and I quote..."the guy defaulted because he had no attorney" That's not accurate.....



You misunderstood my response. I did'nt mean that the court requires a party to have an attorney so therefor he defaulted, I meant that he defaulted because he could not afford an attorney to get proper legal advice.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

agree with sodusme and disagree with gunsmoke. If a person is found guilty and ordered to pay back restitution/penalties for sat piracy, could the plaintiffs (nag and their lawyers) file a motion to attach/garnish?? absolutely. But those motions are not automatic. In situations when default judgments are entered then motions to attach/garnish are basically guaranteed because the defendant isn't there to argue their case.

I have sat through many civil and criminal proceedings and I've heard hearings on motions to attach/garnish. And from my experiences, the judge often will try to get both sides to "work it out". I've found that judges often have empathy for a person's financial situation regardless of their guilt. But the crimes that they have been found guilty of, their health, criminal/civil history and so many other factors CAN come into play. This is not a 1 plus 1 equals 2 type of thing.

After a defendant is found guilty, the plaintiff makes a motion to attach/garnish. If the defendant has a skilled attorney, they will petition to the court every reason why a garnishment or attachment would cause an excessive burden and harm on the defendant. So the example of the poor guy on limited to no income. There are NO hard and fast rules which says that his income will be garnished REGARDLESS. There are no hard and fast rules that says every penny that goes to his account will automatically be taken. It is not that black and white. There are different courts, different judges and so many other variables in place. It's a case by case basis. I am by no means a legal expert but I have sat in on several hearings on these types of issues.


What did I say that you disagree with ? Don't think I said much on garnishment. But courts do have a process where plaintif can have a defendant examined to find out where assets are - judgment debtor examination. if this is what you diagree with ?




Examinations, referred to as Judgment Debtor Exams or a (JDX) of the debtor are conducted in front of a district court judge, and the debtor is required to make the debtor answer questions about his or her assets, or face the possibility of imprisonment for contempt of court. The moving attorney of judgment holder is able to request that the court issue an order, during the exam that forces the debtor to answer questions or be jailed.

The debtor is not allowed in the law to use the fifth as a response to any questions as the debtor is already deemed as convicted and he/she must answer any question put forth to them or face an order to comply or be jailed for non compliance.

The JDX is considered to be in many civil actions the most effective manner to collect judgments as the debtor's potential incarceration is used as a motivating factor for then to answer questions of pay off the judgment.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Sure but if that individual has no assets or finances to speak of than what? The court can levy that John Doe make payment in X amount of days but only if John Doe has the means to make said payment.

I guess what I'm saying is the court has done its job when it says "Mr. John Doe it is hear by ordered that you pay ABC Co. the sum of X amount of dollars". From then on its on you the plaintiff to actually collect. The court will step in as you said and confirm or deny that the individual actually has the means to pay the judgement or they will even make a ruling that the defendant has X amount of days to pay the judgement if he in fact has the means. But they cannot and will not "go after" an individual to make them pay.

Courts were set up to rule on wrong doing and pass down fines and fees and so forth. They weren't set up to be a collection agency after they have made their ruling.


Well I do see court processes after a judgment is issued that does help someone try to collect. Being a plaintiff and having received a default judgment we than had an examination hearing where the defendants was asked financial questions. Now this was in small claims court in Canada but I believe it exists or similar in most jurisdictions in North America. Collecting is much harder than getting a judgment and requires a lot of work and it does depend on how much your willing to put into it but you can try. I am speaking on the side of being a plaintiff myself and putting in that effort to collect knowing the typical escapes a defendant will try. It works both ways. Defendant tries to escape and Plaintiff tries to avoid that from happening.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

A collection agency can't get blood from a stone but they sure can make one's life a living hell.


Yes if it really is a real stone and not a fake stone put up with the intention of hiding assets. They can't collect if you don't have but some people do have and try to present that they don't.


I expect to be facing that with someone with a court judgment but I also plan on conducting an asset search and more. I plan on doing what I can on my own and using the court where I can.



GS2

[sodusme]

Yes if it really is a real stone and not a fake stone put up with the intention of hiding assets. They can't collect if you don't have but some people do have and try to present that they don't.


I expect to be facing that with someone with a court judgment but I also plan on conducting an asset search and more. I plan on doing what I can on my own and using the court where I can.





GS2

Exactly that's the whole thing.

You can do an asset search and you can even have the courts assist in trying to determine if the individual has any assets and has the ability to pay. But once that is complete and its been determined that the individual does not have the means to pay you are dead in the water. The court can no longer assist. I know one individual had said:
if it was easy to get around a court judgement, there would be no reason to have courts of law and what I'm saying is and I'm sure you know this GS2 is that they are two different things. A court ruling and the subsequent collection attempt are two different things.

[1boxman]

I do not think its a case if they won't go after Canadians.. Canadian laws are different on piracy and penalties . very possible not worth it for them right now and they would need a home base law firm(in Canada) to take care of it . With file sharing there is one that is trying to get going . So guess time will tell . I am talking about the end users not dealers or server operators or on a larger scale.

Here is some read..scroll down to
http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=C2&Mode=1&Parl=37&Ses=3&source=library_prb#1limitation

Complete
http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=C2&Mode=1&Parl=37&Ses=3&source=library_prb#1limitation

[sodusme]

I do not think its a case if they won't go after Canadians.. Canadian laws are different on piracy and penalties . very possible not worth it for them right now and they would need a home base law firm(in Canada) to take care of it . With file sharing there is one that is trying to get going . So guess time will tell . I am talking about the end users not dealers or server operators or on a larger scale.

Here is some read..scroll down to
http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=C2&Mode=1&Parl=37&Ses=3&source=library_prb#1limitation

Complete
http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=C2&Mode=1&Parl=37&Ses=3&source=library_prb#1limitation

Thanks I was wondering where Canada stood on the DMCA and copyright laws I'll give this a read later. I'm suspecting that Canada's stance on the DMCA is the main reason. I don't know that they recognize it in its entirety and that may be why DN will not pursue end users over the border.

[1boxman]

Thanks I was wondering where Canada stood on the DMCA and copyright laws I'll give this a read later. I'm suspecting that Canada's stance on the DMCA is the main reason. I don't know that they recognize it in its entirety and that may be why DN will not pursue end users over the border.

It little different...plus the grey law comes into affect ..guess a few overlaps

[sodusme]

It little different...plus the grey law comes into affect ..guess a few overlaps

I think ultimately that is the answer then. I mean DN can't very well come over the border and litigate against people using a law that was for the most part assembled here state side. Canada is not going to allow their citizens to be litigated against using a section or sub-section of an act (the DMCA) that they as a country do not embrace fully.

I would bet if someone reviewed Canada law closely they would see that is why server ops were prosecuted there. My guess is that that type of activity breaks some of Canadian law.

[DualTest]

It really comes down to this, at the very least, they are going to receive $3500 for sending out a letter. And $10,000 if they go to court. If they didn't think they were going to make that investment of time back, then they wouldn't have invested that time to begin with.

As for Canadian end users. I am assuming, at this time, it is not monetarily prudent for them to do it. But they have all the ammo should they ever decide that it is time. I have no doubt it will come eventually. Maybe when the US side of the equation is getting less prosperous. These are lawyers we are dealing with and that is their only concern.

[Anubis]

It really comes down to this, at the very least, they are going to receive $3500 for sending out a letter. And $10,000 if they go to court. If they didn't think they were going to make that investment of time back, then they wouldn't have invested that time to begin with.

As for Canadian end users. I am assuming, at this time, it is not monetarily prudent for them to do it. But they have all the ammo should they ever decide that it is time. I have no doubt it will come eventually. Maybe when the US side of the equation is getting less prosperous. These are lawyers we are dealing with and that is their only concern.

Based on the amount of wuff clients they have it could be a while before the well runs dry. :rolleyes:

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Exactly that's the whole thing.

You can do an asset search and you can even have the courts assist in trying to determine if the individual has any assets and has the ability to pay. But once that is complete and its been determined that the individual does not have the means to pay you are dead in the water. The court can no longer assist. I know one individual had said: and what I'm saying is and I'm sure you know this GS2 is that they are two different things. A court ruling and the subsequent collection attempt are two different things.



Was merely pointing out that after judgment there still remains court assistance where a defenant can be compelled to answers questions on his financial situation.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

It little different...plus the grey law comes into affect ..guess a few overlaps


There is no more grey law in Canada anymore on Sat reception.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

yeah that would be the thing but then who is doing all the instigating stateside though... is it nagra or dn really? I know they are both named on it but does nagra really care? seems to me if their crap was secure they would be out of a job so they intentionally make faulty code and refer to it as job security LOL


It would be Bev and Nagra most likely who would file lawsuits against end users in Canada if that were to happen although it could be one like Bev and DN has a right to sue also under the RC Act in Canada also but probably wouldn't.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Thanks I was wondering where Canada stood on the DMCA and copyright laws I'll give this a read later. I'm suspecting that Canada's stance on the DMCA is the main reason. I don't know that they recognize it in its entirety and that may be why DN will not pursue end users over the border.


DMCA is US law and does not apply in Canada. Canada has its own laws that deal with Sat stuff.



GS2

[Nostradamus]

There is no more grey law in Canada anymore on Sat reception.



GS2

yep way the law is written in Canada it is against the law to have the capabilities to decrypt any encrypted signal whether it be satellite tv or police broadcasts without proper authorization. So when it comes to people ripping off DN the FTA box itself as long as it is factory is no threat in itself. Load a 3rd party file on well.... it is still no threat unless you have a code to card server but would the law look at it that way? Does the law consider that all 3 be present in order for them to be illegal? If so then posting and distributing 3rd party software would not be a big deal unless you had the code to go with it. The code itself would not be a big deal without the 3rd party software either. It is already established the receivers are legal, thus public sales. SO do all three items have to be present to prove guilt? Interesting to say the least. If all three have to be present in order to prove it's use they would have to prove you was in possession of all three. Would the bin and and code have to be installed in the box to be illegal or would a stock FTA and the bin along with server code on a flash drive be deemed illegal? Cdn law doesn't say you have to have done it. It basically says if you have the capabilities.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

yep way the law is written in Canada it is against the law to have the capabilities to decrypt any encrypted signal whether it be satellite tv or police broadcasts without proper authorization. So when it comes to people ripping off DN the FTA box itself as long as it is factory is no threat in itself. Load a 3rd party file on well.... it is still no threat unless you have a code to card server but would the law look at it that way? Does the law consider that all 3 be present in order for them to be illegal? If so then posting and distributing 3rd party software would not be a big deal unless you had the code to go with it. The code itself would not be a big deal without the 3rd party software either. It is already established the receivers are legal, thus public sales. SO do all three items have to be present to prove guilt? Interesting to say the least. If all three have to be present in order to prove it's use they would have to prove you was in possession of all three. Would the bin and and code have to be installed in the box to be illegal or would a stock FTA and the bin along with server code on a flash drive be deemed illegal? Cdn law doesn't say you have to have done it. It basically says if you have the capabilities.


The Canadian law addresses the unlawful decoding of an subscription service ( encrypted signal ) without the lawful authorization by the lawful distributor of that signal in Canada. As far as equipment, you can be guilty is there is reasonable inference it was used as being used in the past tense, is being used as current or is intended to be used as being future to violate the act.


So if for instance your caught with factory box but also caught with decoding software capable of doing the unlawful decoding on your computer it can be reasonable inference that factory non modified was was intended to be used for unlawful decoding. So I would agree with your below conclusion.



Would the bin and and code have to be installed in the box to be illegal or would a stock FTA and the bin along with server code on a flash drive be deemed illegal? Cdn law doesn't say you have to have done it. It basically says if you have the capabilities.



GS2

[Grave Digger]

here is my 2 cents worth.....

thousands of codes sold (maybe tens of thousands), and only a small percentage of those people receiving letters,

there must be/has to be some reasoning as to why they are targeting certain people,

in my opinion, if you receive a letter you are going to be paying SOMETHING,

so might as well try to negotiate the original $3500 down to anything less than that before it becomes 5-10K

ignoring the letter will only make it worse

[RG6A]

No way of knowing how many letters went out.

[tbird686]

i'm guessing they target the people on here who shout codes for sale codes for sale........then they go for them and from there accounts .......they send letters out.

[mudflap]

Does anyone know if there is any criminal liabilty that come after you settle with them?

[sodusme]

here is my 2 cents worth.....

thousands of codes sold (maybe tens of thousands), and only a small percentage of those people receiving letters,

there must be/has to be some reasoning as to why they are targeting certain people,

in my opinion, if you receive a letter you are going to be paying SOMETHING,

so might as well try to negotiate the original $3500 down to anything less than that before it becomes 5-10K

ignoring the letter will only make it worse

There probably is some kind of vetting process I would imagine.

Mortgage records are public record I do believe? Not sure if it will tell them what you owe on the property but you could certainly find out what taxes are paid and so forth. If the individual owns property i.e. a home or land than there is a good chance they have other assets too. Hell even DMV records would be public. So they could find out if you own a car. If you have a license as opposed to an i.d. there is a good chance you are using that license to drive. So I'm assuming there are "other ways" besides obtaining a credit report which would technically put them in violation with the FTC. Most everything asset wise is public information now.

[clarkBENT]

There probably is some kind of vetting process I would imagine.

Mortgage records are public record I do believe? Not sure if it will tell them what you owe on the property but you could certainly find out what taxes are paid and so forth. If the individual owns property i.e. a home or land than there is a good chance they have other assets too. Hell even DMV records would be public. So they could find out if you own a car. If you have a license as opposed to an i.d. there is a good chance you are using that license to drive. So I'm assuming there are "other ways" besides obtaining a credit report which would technically put them in violation with the FTC. Most everything asset wise is public information now.

It's very easy to do a title search on home ownership (with the right tools or contacting the county's recorder/assessor office). You can even find out what mortgages were recorded against the grant deed. Based on the loan amount and origination date, they can quickly determine how much is owed. Given a name and a city I can get that information in less than two minutes.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Does anyone know if there is any criminal liabilty that come after you settle with them?


People sometimes settle not because they admit guilt but that the costs to defend are prohibitive, too much stress, Etc. Settling is not admitting wrongdoing like going to trial and getting a guilty verdict.


If you decide to pay on the demand letter you can state your not admitting any wrongdoing with complying with the demand. A lawyer can advise on this.



GS2