No Lawyers required

[missclinton]

re: demand (extortion) letters

your honor, before you judge me, please consider the following query?

- is it illegal to buy a code/don?
NO

- then, is it criminal or civil to buy such a code?
surely NOT both, right?

so, let us examine why it is claimant is filing a civil suit as it pertains to buying said, codes

it has been purported, that, by purchasing such a code, the end user, by his/herself, is then circumventing DN's programming...let us ask these questions

- can we (end users) connect to a server with any of these codes?
yes

- does the end user need special SW to accomplish this?
yes

- does the end user need hardware (namely) plaintiff's accusations that, "illegal receivers" are being used to circumvent their signal/programming
NO
...little known fact(s) here, your honor, for the purposes of argument, and is only ONE example and demonstration of a SW named, NOI (proggy) that can be Dll'd, installed, and run by loading the code (online) and all info in order for end user to then connect to server..be they nfps, rocket or any other such operation who are, by the way, the ONLY ones responsible for "circumventing" plaintiff's sigs/programs as opposed to the plaintiff's claim that the end user is circumventing such programming and so forth...after the demo, the argument goes as follows

- can the plaintiff prove to your honor that this (purported) end user ever connected to any such server? even if the court accepted the argument that, end user is responsible for, "circumvention"?
NO plaintiff had/has no logs

...however, even if it "could" be argued that buying the code meant there was high probability? the answer is yes? did my demonstration already prove one can indeed connect BUT simply proving it is possible to connect by simply purchasing such a code?

would it not be incumbent upon the plaintiff, that, the missing piece to their claim of loss revenues and contravening of the DMCA is prove to the court that "circumventing" alone, as it is stated in "that" act would require all hardware?
yes

- even if they win the first part of their argument/claim, can the plaintiff then, prove, such hardware was indeed used or even prove which SPECIFIC server end user connected to?
NO

your honor, even if plaintiff proves this end user INDEED purchased a code/don? to then prove circumventing their sig/programming by the use of said code/don wouldn't they need supportive evidence, ie; all hardware along with "illegal receivers", files, bins, SW to alter and SUCCESSFULLY view such programming to satisfy their claim? not to mention actual server logs?
YES

your honor, without such supported evidence? you would be left with ruling on "speculative evidence" as this end user was able to clearly demonstrate to the court, any one can have a code and connect to these servers WITHOUT hardware BUT not necessarily means they are capable of viewing or have ever viewed plaintiff's programming

in conclusion, i'm not a scientist, engineer, or even a lawyer, but i have to ask, as a laymen, "your honor" what other reason is this case doing in your court if it isn't for the sole purpose of "scare mongering"? for if it was illegal to simply purchase a code/don?

first, it would be filed in criminal court.. second, this court and many more across this great nation, would be filled if plaintiffs were allowed to file with claims of "intent" with no end in sight...

I am respectfully requesting your honor to see this for what it is and dismiss this CLAIM AND SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO COMPANIES LIKE DN...these tactics should NOT be viewed, seriously without connecting "all the dots" as well, the DMCA and reference to, has NO place in this filing.

[Nostradamus]

And could you please tell the court how you used the code and connected to the said server without having the proper hardware to decrypt tv. I am not saying your plan wouldn't work if you caught the judge on a nice day and he had a tee off time scheduled but I think as well worded as it is you also better have a stack of rebuttals when the other lawyers start blowing holes in your scheme

[jazzman]

misscliton, that is a very well thought out defense and may work but...the question is, with the right lawyer wouldn't this cost much more than the original DN demand? If you've got the cash I'd love to see it tried in court because I think it would be a very valid defense and could ultimately end this round of distortion letters as I am well versed in the way this Texan Law firm operates. Trust me ....but if it was defended well and all had to be proven then the provider would have to reevaluate these tactics. It's not like the Dark Angel cases where the provider had all the sever logs, connected IP's and had your ass. In this case all they have is the fact that you purchased a "code" which intself can not prove that you used such code for illeagal purposes. From all that I've read they don't have the server logs from anyone "THE RAT" was associated with. All they have is the true facts that you purchased a code and what that does THAT prove...NOTHING! Just my 2 cents plus inflation which now cost me 2 bucks LOL...

[missclinton]

And could you please tell the court how you used the code and connected to the said server without having the proper hardware to decrypt tv. I am not saying your plan wouldn't work if you caught the judge on a nice day and he had a tee off time scheduled but I think as well worded as it is you also better have a stack of rebuttals when the other lawyers start blowing holes in your scheme

well, that was why i would demo to the court with my laptop, that, indeed with a code you can connect to any server with ease by dll'g and loading all pertinent info that is supplied with code to the NOI proggy

so then, your honor, is it also illegal to load NOI proggy?
NO

as you can clearly see your honor, anyone CAN indeed connect to these servers with NOI from anywhere in the world for that matter and NEVER ever even view their (plaintiff's content) as they claim since one would also need associated hardware...therefore, purchasing and loading a code and connecting to servers is simply NOT enough to prove their claim UNLESS they can show the court just what HARDWARE was also used by end user ALONG with said code and logs to point to what specific server and what content (programming) was it that was viewed...

period...oh and your honor, may i wish you and yours the "Happiest Holidays" :)

ps, my neighbour is connected this very second to a server via NOI and has been for past week and NOT once ever able to view DN's content, why? cuz NO hardware is hooked-up ... ;)

[missclinton]

misscliton, that is a very well thought out defense and may work but...the question is, with the right lawyer wouldn't this cost much more than the original DN demand? If you've got the cash I'd love to see it tried in court because I think it would be a very valid defense and could ultimately end this round of distortion letters as I am well versed in the way this Texan Law firm operates. Trust me ....but if it was defended well and all had to be proven then the provider would have to reevaluate these tactics. It's not like the Dark Angel cases where the provider had all the sever logs, connected IP's and had your ass. In this case all they have is the fact that you purchased a "code" which intself can not prove that you used such code for illeagal purposes. From all that I've read they don't have the server logs from anyone "THE RAT" was associated with. All they have is the true facts that you purchased a code and what that does THAT prove...NOTHING! Just my 2 cents plus inflation which now cost me 2 bucks LOL...

oh forgot, an "ACCUSED" (end user) would NOT need a lawyer to make these "civil" arguments -" common sense" would rule the day!

therefore the cost would be "your" time and THAT'S the beauty of it all IT would be the BEST last laugh AT DN's attorneys in these cockamamy cases.. ;)

[1boxman]

There are a lot of things you can buy...but can not use . The code can only be used for thing and one thing only .

Even the older hubs that tried the weather thing ..did work for awhile. But there where no codes other than files..and that killed it . So the codes are like a file..info still has to be entered for thing .

Good luck .

[kenkell1]

There are a lot of things you can buy...but can not use . The code can only be used for thing and one thing only .

Even the older hubs that tried the weather thing ..did work for awhile. But there where no codes other than files..and that killed it . So the codes are like a file..info still has to be entered for thing .

Good luck .

but but sir no one told me I had to have dish to get anything or a reciever. All that was said is if I bought this code I would get TV. Nothing was said about anything being illegal....Oh my....what is a guy to do? Go back to rabbit ears??

[1boxman]

The only question is..did you use it ?? and they would have to prove you did .
But If you bought the code ..seeing how its only for one use...pretty hard to say you didnt know what it was for ..lol
But hey ..ppl win the lotto all the time.

[kenkell1]

heck yes I used it. It said get Dn with this code and I put it in a program called NOI that a friend told me about and turned on the tv and nothing. ALL I saw on tv was a snowy screen. I think I got ripped off ....oh well , less learned I guess. http://www.yoursmiles.org/bsmile/fun/b0221.gif (http://www.yoursmiles.org/b-fun.php)

[Nostradamus]

LOL too funny man, but if the code did say get DN then you are attempting piracy just the same whether your tv is snowy or not... now are you referring to your real tv or the one displayed in the NOI program? Be damned difficult trying to watch a hockey or football game on that teeny little thing hehehe

[1boxman]

Too many beers if it was snowy..lol

[kenkell1]

LOL too funny man, but if the code did say get DN then you are attempting piracy just the same whether your tv is snowy or not... now are you referring to your real tv or the one displayed in the NOI program? Be damned difficult trying to watch a hockey or football game on that teeny little thing hehehe

Heyyy what you callin teeny???????http://www.yoursmiles.org/bsmile/fun/b0216.gif (http://www.yoursmiles.org/b-fun.php)

[missclinton]

misscliton, that is a very well thought out defense and may work but...the question is, with the right lawyer wouldn't this cost much more than the original DN demand? If you've got the cash I'd love to see it tried in court because I think it would be a very valid defense and could ultimately end this round of distortion letters as I am well versed in the way this Texan Law firm operates. Trust me ....but if it was defended well and all had to be proven then the provider would have to reevaluate these tactics. It's not like the Dark Angel cases where the provider had all the sever logs, connected IP's and had your ass. In this case all they have is the fact that you purchased a "code" which intself can not prove that you used such code for illeagal purposes. From all that I've read they don't have the server logs from anyone "THE RAT" was associated with. All they have is the true facts that you purchased a code and what that does THAT prove...NOTHING! Just my 2 cents plus inflation which now cost me 2 bucks LOL...

you are 100% bang on with the DA end users...nag had them dead to rights with paper trail..BUT i highly doubt all end users who connected to DA's servers were nabbed ESP in cases where many of them prob paid cash.so its NOT like they nabbed all end users who bought from DA

btw - the example i used re: NOI is only ONE argument...we in the community should all try and realize lawyers arent GODS even though many of them think they are...to most peeps they think just b/c they got served they're done...i always like the dude who says "i know you tried to screw me" or " ill sue your ass" and the come back is most always the same, "PROVE IT"..cuz its one thing to claim something proving it is quite a different game

these civil cases are always filled with holes (technical or otherwise) and the majority of these claims are dismissed without any judgement for plaintiffs IF civil courts were predicated on findings on "intent" alone? this world would stop in its tracks...and you are right on "server logs" IT might be the crux of these claims that much more provable what with pointing to your IP and still THAT might not be enough for IF IT WAS?? wonder why when they closed NF's home site and all the other players why they didnt sniff out all the end users who connected to their (so-called) public servers?? hmmmm...i tell ya, so many holes in these latest rounds with these demand letters its too funny

in texas? 85% of civil cases are dismissed (thrown out) for lack of supporting evidence...someone pls point to ONE case in civil courts whereby a plaintiff won with the simple notion they claimed the accused INTENDED to screw you and ill eat my words ...

btw next yr, i plan on drving up to DN HQ and ask for directions and stuff like that all the while making sure they see my plates - IKSGURU - just to rub their noses in it.. now THAT i will get recorded and upload on youtube, just for kicks.. ;)

[missclinton]

The only question is..did you use it ?? and they would have to prove you did .
But If you bought the code ..seeing how its only for one use...pretty hard to say you didnt know what it was for ..lol
But hey ..ppl win the lotto all the time.

you def can tell the judge you bought the code and intended to use and in fact did BUT all the while you didnt see squat cuz you werent told you needed to get alll the other supporting hardware and SW and once you found out what alll THAT entailed|? YOU SCRAPPPED the whole idea cuz it was way out of your budget...and THEN see how claimant answers the LOSSES they claim they lost cuz YOU supposedly watched (viewed) their programming with buying a code..what was that amount? 3500.00?? yah right,

thats why its called EXTORTION... ;) you dont need to be a lawyer to figure THAT out

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

you def can tell the judge you bought the code and intended to use and in fact did BUT all the while you didnt see squat cuz you werent told you needed to get alll the other supporting hardware and SW and once you found out what alll THAT entailed|? YOU SCRAPPPED the whole idea cuz it was way out of your budget...and THEN see how claimant answers the LOSSES they claim they lost cuz YOU supposedly watched (viewed) their programming with buying a code..what was that amount? 3500.00?? yah right,

thats why its called EXTORTION... ;) you dont need to be a lawyer to figure THAT out


Sure you can tell any story you want. You'll be telling it to the Plaintiffs who will at one point depose you on your story.


Not trying to be a party pooper but stories given that are made up don't usually have a happy ending to the story in court.



GS2

[sideswiper]

I promise to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth lol

[missclinton]

I promise to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth lol

lol hey, if i was rich? you betcha i would, not like its criminal to buy and connect to a server...anyways, the NOI is the key to the argument as pointed out ..so, no one has to cop to it just demo the connection to the judge...you get the idea, im sure.

[sodusme]

I've said this many times over its like buying a "key" from a drug dealer with the knowledge that you can use said key to obtain drugs by unlocking a certain door. Is it a crime to have bought said "key"? Of course it isn't. Is it a crime to unlock said door to obtain the drugs? Of course it is but as missclinton says "prove it".

Basically this is just a hybrid extortion scheme patterned after the witch hunt that DirecTV went on concerning the football cards and the unloopers. They cannot prove you actually watched anything. Period.

[missclinton]

I've said this many times over its like buying a "key" from a drug dealer with the knowledge that you can use said key to obtain drugs by unlocking a certain door. Is it a crime to have bought said "key"? Of course it isn't. Is it a crime to unlock said door to obtain the drugs? Of course it is but as missclinton says "prove it".

Basically this is just a hybrid extortion scheme patterned after the witch hunt that DirecTV went on concerning the football cards and the unloopers. They cannot prove you actually watched anything. Period.

Bang on, sod...and this is why i say you dont even need a lawyer to argue your case...cuz thats the other thinking behind drawing up these letters..they think the dude will be so scared off by lawyer fees
NOT realizing of course that MANY of us KNOW in civil cases you argue all your own

and if presented like a common sense approach as i would with NOI? easy as pie, no way in hell plaintiff wins this UNLESS you fail to show..cuz judges are just as stupid as the next ESP with the mumbo jumbo these plaintiffs NAG/DN have drawn up in their filing..in other words, "muddying the waters"...anyone whos been in this hobby long enough can see "that" , clear as day

wonder if nag wont like this thread? bets? ;)

[missclinton]

their whole case is predicated upon the fact, that, dude has VIEWED their content "illegally" by simply purchasing these codes? and they wont even go those extra steps to prove to the court/judge this, by connecting ALL NECESSARY steps?

Poppycock

your honor? where are these losses that justify this 3500.00 demand letter/claim if I havent even seen one second of their programming? as you can see your honor, i can and have connected to this server, via NOI - time and time again and damn it no channels show up...you tell me your honor, i had intended to view DN's programming with this code but could NOT

so, your honor, am i then guilty, for "attempting" to view? therefor GUILTY for simple, "intent" by buying a code??

cuz your honor, most peeps who buy these codes don't even have the necessary hardware to even view their content, let alone those who dont even know how to alter an illegal receiver should they even decide to buy one...

as you can see there are way too many steps to make this whole scheme work, your honor, and plaintiffs bring this case to "you" (the court) with the slimmest of evidence to try and claim these losses? again, your honor, I ask that you dismiss this case for lack of evidence.

no one needs a lawyer to make these observations and arguments... however, if you are not as comfortable in court and/or presenting your case? you can always have a friend, relative, etc act as your agent and speak on your behalf...again, its NOT criminal...where in criminal you get legal aid in worse of financial positions and your "mouth piece" gets hired to speak for you

[sodusme]

their whole case is predicated upon the fact, that, dude has VIEWED their content "illegally" by simply purchasing these codes? and they wont even go those extra steps to prove to the court/judge this, by connecting ALL NECESSARY steps?

Poppycock

your honor? where are these losses that justify this 3500.00 demand letter/claim if I havent even seen one second of their programming? as you can see your honor, i can and have connected to this server, via NOI - time and time again and damn it no channels show up...you tell me your honor, i had intended to view DN's programming with this code but could NOT

so, your honor, am i then guilty, for "attempting" to view? therefor GUILTY for simple, "intent" by buying a code??

cuz your honor, most peeps who buy these codes don't even have the necessary hardware to even view their content, let alone those who dont even know how to alter an illegal receiver should they even decide to buy one...

as you can see there are way too many steps to make this whole scheme work, your honor, and plaintiffs bring this case to "you" (the court) with the slimmest of evidence to try and claim these losses? again, your honor, I ask that you dismiss this case for lack of evidence.

no one needs a lawyer to make these observations and arguments... however, if you are not as comfortable in court and/or presenting your case? you can always have a friend, relative, etc act as your agent and speak on your behalf...again, its NOT criminal...where in criminal you get legal aid in worse of financial positions and your "mouth piece" gets hired to speak for you

Actually you raise a VERY good point. I posted something on this subject matter a while ago in a different thread. If you read the DMCA clause carefully that they are suing the end user under it very specifically talks about "dealing", "selling" and "manufacturing" the items necessary for the piracy. The clause that pertains to "possession" and "use" is another clause that to my knowledge is not being used in these court cases.

I'm sure you know its not hard to read the DMCA clause. Yeah its filled with a bunch of technical jargon at spots but if you follow the "paragraph" and "section" and "sub-section" its not hard to realize they are suing IMO under the wrong clause of the DMCA. A clause that they simply cannot prove. Now I know they only have to prove 51% to your 49% in civil court but they shouldn't even be able to prove that much.

Possession does not equate to use. Simple as that.

[goadus]

Unless they DO have evidence that you watched their programming. As far as I know, they have never had to prove that because no one has ever taken it to court. Good thread. Maybe it could lead a class action suit aganist dn for those that were extorted. JMO.

[missclinton]

Unless they DO have evidence that you watched their programming. As far as I know, they have never had to prove that because no one has ever taken it to court. Good thread. Maybe it could lead a class action suit aganist dn for those that were extorted. JMO.

yep, thats why they decided on the civil route...trust me, had they gone the criminal route? they'd be held to higher standards and LAUGHED out of court...snakes...its getting to the point where THEY are worse than the ones involved in the hobby...whats worse, Sat Piracy or Extortion? ;)

[Grave Digger]

re: demand (extortion) letters

your honor, before you judge me, please consider the following query?

- is it illegal to buy a code/don?
NO



judge "then WTF did you purchase it for? what was your INTENTION when you purchased this code?"

intent is the only thing the plaintiff needs to prove

your response??????????????

[missclinton]

judge "then WTF did you purchase it for? what was your INTENTION when you purchased this code?"

intent is the only thing the plaintiff needs to prove

your response??????????????


yep, exactly, my intent was to view open channels..NO one NO where was i told it was illegal to buy that code nor is it considered illegal or against the law even if DN/NAG would like it to be...illegal to view? you betcha, PROVE i viewed your programming? and you got me dead to rights but THAT would be a criminal act according to the DMCA..intent is NOT illegal, ;)

[Grave Digger]

yep, exactly, my intent was to view open channels..NO one NO where was i told it was illegal to buy that code nor is it considered illegal or against the law even if DN/NAG would like it to be...illegal to view? you betcha, PROVE i viewed your programming? and you got me dead to rights but THAT would be a criminal act according to the DMCA..intent is NOT illegal, ;)

yeah try that in court and the judge will laugh at you, followed by these words......

"judgement for the plaintiff"

[kenkell1]

yeah try that in court and the judge will laugh at you, followed by these words......

"judgement for the plaintiff"

nothing was stated on the website that anything I purchased on the internet was illegal......
why is it aloud on the internet if it's illegal your honor??? all I wanted was TV....and I thought I was buying tv at a great price that I couldn't refuse but then when I bought the code I waited for two or three days and still had no damn tv channels when i turned the tv on. I thought it was a scam and still think it is because my tv still have good channels.....ya know what I mean your honour? EH!!

[missclinton]

yeah try that in court and the judge will laugh at you, followed by these words......

"judgement for the plaintiff"

well,like i asked b4, point me to ONE case civil where a judge ruled for the plaintiff based on INTENT alone and even if one did? make sure it passed THAT smell test on appeal and THEN you might be offered a job with DN/NAG

remember, "intent" is 99% used in Criminal cases as opposed to civil

see, hxxp://thelawdictionary.org/criminal-intent/

see any clear case there on Civill cases using "intent"??

and of course defendant MUST admit intent otherwise it is VERY hard to prove it (mens rea) without much more supporting evidence

yah, i see dn has many peeps running scared with these flimsy civil cases

[Nostradamus]

maybe you should represent the next guy (pro bono) announcing they got a letter and when the dust settles report back on how you done. Two possile outcomes I would think. You win the case and the guy is off the hook and you come back smelling like a rose, or, you lose the case he is on the hook for the original costs plus additional costs incurred by trying to fight it and you have egg on your face.

seems like you have an iron clad case all laid out so I suggest you go for it and see what happens. I am sure many others beside myself would love to see you put an end to these letters once and for all

[sodusme]

"Intent" is always used in criminal matters i.e. "Drug possession with the intent to distribute", "Assault with intent to do great bodily harm", "Larceny with intent to sell or distribute". The list goes on and on but they are always used in criminal OR tort law. Which tort law doesn't apply here either.

[kyzursozay]

hmmmmmm...........perhaps missclintion can explain how she would counter the dn attorney when they respectfuly ask the judge to rule in their favor after presenting emails, posts, pp records & PM's proving she indeed had the necessary hardware to illegally receive dn programming ............. all of which many other posters have verified they did indicate with demand letters....... remember in civil actions its a preponderance of evidence that usually rules ...........and before you answer .............remember dn has taken down virtually every fta manufacturer/distribuitor over the yrs..... virtually all had to promise to help with sat piracy in the future........those take-downs always included cutomer (enduser) records (i.e. who bought that SV8K on Sept. 11, 2009, that 8psk module, & that svLan) ...............so anyone willing to go toe to toe better have all their ducks in line cause you really don't know what they have........jmo.........lol

[missclinton]

hmmmmmm...........perhaps missclintion can explain how she would counter the dn attorney when they respectfuly ask the judge to rule in their favor after presenting emails, posts, pp records & PM's proving she indeed had the necessary hardware to illegally receive dn programming ............. all of which many other posters have verified they did indicate with demand letters....... remember in civil actions its a preponderance of evidence that usually rules ...........and before you answer .............remember dn has taken down virtually every fta manufacturer/distribuitor over the yrs..... virtually all had to promise to help with sat piracy in the future........those take-downs always included cutomer (enduser) records (i.e. who bought that SV8K on Sept. 11, 2009, that 8psk module, & that svLan) ...............so anyone willing to go toe to toe better have all their ducks in line cause you really don't know what they have........jmo.........lol

if what you suggest were true? explain why with all the FTA sites they have taken down they didnt go after end users ESP dummie site where they had all that "incriminating evidence" via loading bins/files to ALTER that hardware...manufacturers and distributors whole diff ball of wax...dave end users that were threatened had already left trails in purchase of unloopers and still they had to connect alll the dots...peeps were actually afraid their installers were parked outside their residence to see if you were viewing their content, illegaly...scare tactics like these letters work to some extent, UNTILL someone stands up to them? this will continue

there is NO written laws out there that an enduser BUYING A CODE TO DECRYPT dn's signals is illegal and what the penalties are IF caught and all the parameters needed to prove a case...despite their attempt to throw the DMCA in their filings...it s call flying by the seat of your pants and THAT is what dn is doing with these letters..again no need to be a lawyer to represent oneself in these civil cases..just show up and represent yourself with confidence you did nothing wrong with the purchase of a code

and connecting to a server via NOI caused you to give up since NO channels ever showed up EVEN if one cops to owning some hardware plaintiff still need to PROVE you viewed their content illegally despite your intent

you can defend yourself with or without mens rea..its the plaintiff who has to prove INTENT until then you say nothing about it..just demo the NOI connection and the failure to view and then the plaintiff is left with INTENT and they know then at that point they will need much more than YOU simply buying a code to prove their claim

[clarkBENT]

They are applying the doctrine of secondary liability to their causes of action. Does the server code have a widely accepted legitimate use?


Not long after the passage of the 1976 Copyright Act, the scope of contributory infringement liability was tested in a case in which the copyright owners claimed that the sale of a recording device – the VCR - illegally contributed to infringement. In Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.[13] was established a variant on contributory liability claims with respect to technologies. When Universal City Studios initially sued Sony for making and selling the Betamax, the theory was that Sony materially contributed to acts of infringement performed by users of the Betamax, and knew or had reason to know that the technology would be used for infringing purposes. The Supreme Court of the United States held that, even though material contributions and knowledge of the infringement are generally sufficient to establish secondary liability, in the case of infringing technology, contributory liability cannot be imposed unless the technology lacks substantial non-infringing uses. As the Court phrased the Sony exception with regard to new technologies: "The sale of copying equipment, like the sale of other articles of commerce, does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes. Indeed, it need merely be capable of substantial noninfringing uses."

[clarkBENT]

openWiFi, betaMAX, CDRs, DVDRs all pass the test of being "widely used for legitimate, unobjectional purposes." Being in possession of a server code is not by itself illegal. However, if the popular use is for circumventing DN's encryption, then by preponderance of the evidence that is what you used it for. The burden now falls on the Defendant to show that it is more widely used for testing uptime on a server (via NOI or IKS4SUNS) than it is for illicit purposes. That's a high bar to cross. Are there other legitimate purposes for being in possession of the IKS server code?

[sodusme]

openWiFi, betaMAX, CDRs, DVDRs all pass the test of being "widely used for legitimate, unobjectional purposes." Being in possession of a server code is not by itself illegal. However, if the popular use is for circumventing DN's encryption, then by preponderance of the evidence that is what you used it for. The burden now falls on the Defendant to show that it is more widely used for testing uptime on a server (via NOI or IKS4SUNS) than it is for illicit purposes. That's a high bar to cross. Are there other legitimate purposes for being in possession of the IKS server code?

Hmm if that is the mark to pass then I'm afraid it will be an uphill battle. I myself cannot think of a legitimate reason to possess a code.

Now of course the judicial system is supposed to be set up "innocent until proven guilty" but of course we all know its the opposite now a days and you are "guilty until proven innocent".

[kyzursozay]

so for the sake of argument .....lol.... lets suppose your in court with little laptop demo of NOI non-existence connected server which you claimed attracted you to purchase of codes ....... after staring at the snowy blank little laptop screen the judge rubs his goatee, then his eyebrow, & looking at the assembly of attorneys, assistants, & techs representing dn/Nag ....... states " What say you gentleman, this hardly appears worth the $3500 damages you seek in the filed demand ......... (whereupon as one team of assistants begins setting up an amazing display of flow charts & graphs detailing every pp fta purchase, fta website nics, posts, ip adresses, etc. etc. you were associated with another team of techs rolls out a cart with the exact same 60"LED HDTV SV8K, 8psk module, svLan & connects to a cable where other techs outside have the same dish, lnb & switch setup you claimed to have on numerous fta sites & verified with pp records aimed at the approiate sat..............at this point the lead senior attorney replies "Your honor we wholeheartedly agree & respectfuly at the courts permission would like to now INCREASE THAT DEMAND 100 fold to $350,000.00!!!!!!!!!!!! as a tech disconnects the broadband RJ 45 cable from your little lappy, plugs in the svLan, punches in your code ................. up pops HD PPV Ch 502 etc. etc. ...................

[sodusme]

so for the sake of argument .....lol.... lets suppose your in court with little laptop demo of NOI non-existence connected server which you claimed attracted you to purchase of codes ....... after staring at the snowy blank little laptop screen the judge rubs his goatee, then his eyebrow, & looking at the assembly of attorneys, assistants, & techs representing dn/Nag ....... states " What say you gentleman, this hardly appears worth the $3500 damages you seek in the filed demand ......... (whereupon as one team of assistants begins setting up an amazing display of flow charts & graphs detailing every pp fta purchase, fta website nics, posts, ip adresses, etc. etc. you were associated with another team of techs rolls out a cart with the exact same 60"LED HDTV SV8K, 8psk module, svLan & connects to a cable where other techs outside have the same dish, lnb & switch setup you claimed to have on numerous fta sites & verified with pp records aimed at the approiate sat..............at this point the lead senior attorney replies "Your honor we wholeheartedly agree & respectfuly at the courts permission would like to now INCREASE THAT DEMAND 100 fold to $350,000.00!!!!!!!!!!!! as a tech disconnects the broadband RJ 45 cable from your little lappy, plugs in the svLan, punches in your code ................. up pops HD PPV Ch 502 etc. etc. ...................

You're giving them waaaaaaaaaaay too much credit. If for instance one has never posted a peep about what "setup" they were running. Which was the case with me btw when I was running a receiver several years ago then just how is this possible:
have the same dish, lnb & switch setup you claimed to have on numerous fta sites & verified with pp records also that would mean the person had bought all their equipment using Paypal. I bought all my stuff cash only with no paper trails anywhere on the 'net. Now what? How would they get my "setup" in court then? LOL They wouldn't that's how and if you say "Well they'll just come by your house and look at what you are running". OK so they do that this dish and switch and crap was there when I moved into the place prove it wasn't.

I know you probably don't want to see anyone get in trouble with this nonsense just like I don't but some of what you "pro letter" guys are posting is just plain inconceivable.

[missclinton]

You're giving them waaaaaaaaaaay too much credit. If for instance one has never posted a peep about what "setup" they were running. Which was the case with me btw when I was running a receiver several years ago then just how is this possible: also that would mean the person had bought all their equipment using Paypal. I bought all my stuff cash only with no paper trails anywhere on the 'net. Now what? How would they get my "setup" in court then? LOL They wouldn't that's how and if you say "Well they'll just come by your house and look at what you are running". OK so they do that this dish and switch and crap was there when I moved into the place prove it wasn't.

I know you probably don't want to see anyone get in trouble with this nonsense just like I don't but some of what you "pro letter" guys are posting is just plain inconceivable.

couldnt have put it any better but will add, trust me, you would def make sure you attend the first meeting (allowed by law) and go through discovery and make out WHAT EXACTLY THEY DO HAVE and from what ive seen to - date?? SQUAT and THAT is what you take this on, for...to show they have SQUAT... ;)

[sodusme]

couldnt have put it any better but will add, trust me, you would def make sure you attend the first meeting (allowed by law) and go through discovery and make out WHAT EXACTLY THEY DO HAVE and from what ive seen to - date?? SQUAT and THAT is what you take this on, for...to show they have SQUAT... ;)

I agree we all know that now a days courts are run with the presumption of who is the "bigger elephant" and has the most money for delays and stall tactics and appeals and so forth. The judges don't care about "justice" anymore they only care about the money involved.

In all honesty all the stuff they have could be refuted with a little time and effort. Now I'm not saying it would be easy but it could be done given enough time and effort and critical thinking on the end users part.

[hondoharry]

I think you can safely assume if they go all the way to court they will have all your posts in all forums under that user name. They have seen your living conditions on Google maps and perhaps run your credit and criminal background checks. If you're clean in all those respects, then yeah, go for defending yourself without a lawyer and see what they got. Not many are.

[missclinton]

I think you can safely assume if they go all the way to court they will have all your posts in all forums under that user name. They have seen your living conditions on Google maps and perhaps run your credit and criminal background checks. If you're clean in all those respects, then yeah, go for defending yourself without a lawyer and see what they got. Not many are.

again. with all the past FTA shutdowns they would have many thousands upon thousands served with extortion letters like these and much sooner than this if what you point out were true. you keep forgetting, these tactics are for scare mongering, and YES there are those that will give in cuz its too damned scary to fight a giant like DN, THATS the problem NO ONE wants to stand up

what have you got to lose by defending yourself? youd be surprised how it works, it dont hurt one bit...the NOI proggy is your best argument, NO way for them to argue around it...go on, how does one get around NOI if alll they have is you buying a code?? any lawyer in the house?

[missclinton]

I think you can safely assume if they go all the way to court they will have all your posts in all forums under that user name. They have seen your living conditions on Google maps and perhaps run your credit and criminal background checks. If you're clean in all those respects, then yeah, go for defending yourself without a lawyer and see what they got. Not many are.

oh and btw, username?? your kiddin right? you DO know ive used like dozens and dozens just like the many many emails...heck remember when they sent emails (not so long ago) to all of those who had user nics at aba THIS with the threat they were coming after everyone?? after reading all PMs ...that was good for chukles, yes?

edit; also,? would it surprise anyone if i suggested that some endusers are lawyers, doc, and yes, even cops? well there are many, and i know when i got involved with this hobby, next door neighbour was a criminal lawyer and HAD to have his dave content, on northern soil...this is when hu was going gang busters every tom dick and harriette wanted dave..so, another argument one can present to the court is, Cherry Picking" ya think they would go after a lawyer's son or daughter or a doctor, or a judge's relative or any peep in high places like that?...i thinks not

[clarkBENT]

"Innocent until proven guilty" is only the burden of proof in criminal proceedings. "Preponderance of the evidence" is the standard for civil proceedings. The judge rules on what the most likely scenario is. Ockham's razor, if you will.


Hmm if that is the mark to pass then I'm afraid it will be an uphill battle. I myself cannot think of a legitimate reason to possess a code.

Now of course the judicial system is supposed to be set up "innocent until proven guilty" but of course we all know its the opposite now a days and you are "guilty until proven innocent".

[kyzursozay]

lol.......sod, hondo, missc, obviously I was being facetious.........lol ......... if they were ever called out for real, they could always choose the nuclear option ...... commercially available...

[1boxman]

again. with all the past FTA shutdowns they would have many thousands upon thousands served with extortion letters like these and much sooner than this if what you point out were true. you keep forgetting, these tactics are for scare mongering, and YES there are those that will give in cuz its too damned scary to fight a giant like DN, THATS the problem NO ONE wants to stand up

what have you got to lose by defending yourself? youd be surprised how it works, it dont hurt one bit...the NOI proggy is your best argument, NO way for them to argue around it...go on, how does one get around NOI if alll they have is you buying a code?? any lawyer in the house?

I do not think it is much scare tactics like the old direct days...plus direct was sorta laugh out of court and asked to stop those letters..These ones today are based on real evidence . Plus it is civil and they do not reveal all evidences until ask for settlement or trial base is setup.
Not saying that they may not be bluffing to a point or on some. But I suspect it is a pretty shut and dry cases .

Things are different now ..plus I don't think they will waste there time now.Much easier for a confection or settlement this way than going after what they posted on sites...like they did in the past .

And by no means to I mean to give up !!!...I think each one will have its own unique way about it .
They are not shooting blanks either in these letters.

[sodusme]

oh and btw, username?? your kiddin right? you DO know ive used like dozens and dozens just like the many many emails...heck remember when they sent emails (not so long ago) to all of those who had user nics at aba THIS with the threat they were coming after everyone?? after reading all PMs ...that was good for chukles, yes?

edit; also,? would it surprise anyone if i suggested that some endusers are lawyers, doc, and yes, even cops? well there are many, and i know when i got involved with this hobby, next door neighbour was a criminal lawyer and HAD to have his dave content, on northern soil...this is when hu was going gang busters every tom dick and harriette wanted dave..so, another argument one can present to the court is, Cherry Picking" ya think they would go after a lawyer's son or daughter or a doctor, or a judge's relative or any peep in high places like that?...i thinks not

Now I can verify that they cherry pick 'cause I had a nick at ABA and logged out the night it was hacked and never returned. I never got a threatening email either. But then I didn't engage in PM's about IKS sales or any other things. I also didn't post about my setup in the open. So I would guess they got to me and there was nothing of interest to pursue so they skipped me. :disappointed:

[missclinton]

Now I can verify that they cherry pick 'cause I had a nick at ABA and logged out the night it was hacked and never returned. I never got a threatening email either. But then I didn't engage in PM's about IKS sales or any other things. I also didn't post about my setup in the open. So I would guess they got to me and there was nothing of interest to pursue so they skipped me. :disappointed:

i think they only went through the list of emails attached to nics when joining or via pms discussions who knows but yah they skipped YOU? dont they know you were trying to save aba'sasses back then?? oh wait, maybe THATS why they skipped you? lol

[missclinton]

I do not think it is much scare tactics like the old direct days...plus direct was sorta laugh out of court and asked to stop those letters..These ones today are based on real evidence . Plus it is civil and they do not reveal all evidences until ask for settlement or trial base is setup.
Not saying that they may not be bluffing to a point or on some. But I suspect it is a pretty shut and dry cases .

Things are different now ..plus I don't think they will waste there time now.Much easier for a confection or settlement this way than going after what they posted on sites...like they did in the past .

And by no means to I mean to give up !!!...I think each one will have its own unique way about it .
They are not shooting blanks either in these letters.

i hear ya to some extent..have any one of these defendants shared other than DN has proof you bought a code

can they prove you actually connected to any such iks server? if so, how? otherwise this dance keeps goin 'round and round and where she stops? nobody knows...all i wanted to do is give these defendants something to work with cuz until i saw with the NOI defense how it can be argued, i harppned back to all the rest of the arguments as well as all others who chimed in with many reasons dn should NOT be filing these claims and get away with simply go after an end user b/c they bought a code, makes no sense tome whatsoever...im tempted to post an old code i bought from those resellers (yes is said it i BOUGHT codes from them) lol like i care?

and let them have at it and come back to me and tell me what server i connected to... meaning, was it ever used..thats the point, owning , purchasing, equates to nothing unless they can prove the losses they are claiming, 3500.00 on the first dance? who determines that amount? why is it a judge finds this accpetable as the "actual" losses if defendant can prove he/she cant even afford cable then how can DN claim he/she was a prospective customer therefore argue those numbers? again, makes no sense to me...i would hazard to guess, the best way for this scheme to work is downgrading the claim to like 500.00 from the getgo (i think would befair) its NOT like you are a distribution rep like alll thhose who got done in for millions..and THEN may then, you begin to put a dent in this scheme (hobby) otherwise this is chasing after the lowend to get nothing in return ..and yes i heard all the arguments on collecting on the judgement(s) still, a peep would NOT go to trial and simply pay the 500 which is a lot more palatable..who knows, during the first meeting? if dn is amenable to those numbers and thats IF peeps feel they have you up the yingyang i just dont see this round of letters putting that much of a dent in the hobby as a whole...nag just needs to close the holes in their security , That, is all they will be left with anyways...

[alex70olds]

i hear ya to some extent..have any one of these defendants shared other than DN has proof you bought a code

can they prove you actually connected to any such iks server? if so, how? otherwise this dance keeps goin 'round and round and where she stops? nobody knows...all i wanted to do is give these defendants something to work with cuz until i saw with the NOI defense how it can be argued, i harppned back to all the rest of the arguments as well as all others who chimed in with many reasons dn should NOT be filing these claims and get away with simply go after an end user b/c they bought a code, makes no sense tome whatsoever...im tempted to post an old code i bought from those resellers (yes is said it i BOUGHT codes from them) lol like i care?

and let them have at it and come back to me and tell me what server i connected to... meaning, was it ever used..thats the point, owning , purchasing, equates to nothing unless they can prove the losses they are claiming, 3500.00 on the first dance? who determines that amount? why is it a judge finds this accpetable as the "actual" losses if defendant can prove he/she cant even afford cable then how can DN claim he/she was a prospective customer therefore argue those numbers? again, makes no sense to me...i would hazard to guess, the best way for this scheme to work is downgrading the claim to like 500.00 from the getgo (i think would befair) its NOT like you are a distribution rep like alll thhose who got done in for millions..and THEN may then, you begin to put a dent in this scheme (hobby) otherwise this is chasing after the lowend to get nothing in return ..and yes i heard all the arguments on collecting on the judgement(s) still, a peep would NOT go to trial and simply pay the 500 which is a lot more palatable..who knows, during the first meeting? if dn is amenable to those numbers and thats IF peeps feel they have you up the yingyang i just dont see this round of letters putting that much of a dent in the hobby as a whole...nag just needs to close the holes in their security , That, is all they will be left with anyways...

Here ya go.

20251

[missclinton]

dollars to donuts they dont go after end users who they realize has been a long time legit customer and risk losing them ? just b/c they are fta hobbiests? not to mention the many contractors/installers or even their own employees that are connecting to iks? they better be getting a sweet deal ..still, its all a fun game for them to watch all the fraidy cats giving in cuz they all think you need a lawyer ..

[missclinton]

Here ya go.

20251

great, now, give me all the contact info of endusers who are on this list...

dn, here's a code

who was it bought from (reseller),
when was it used?
to what server did it connect to?

53286908418324

last of all who actually bought that code? oh wait, you need a rat, dontcha...still, have at it :)

[alex70olds]

great, now, give me all the contact info of endusers who are on this list...

lol too easy. Don't think anybody plays fair.

[ShotGun]

I know what everyone is going to say, but heck how much would it cost to bring them to your state and change a judges mind.
Mo money Mo money Mo/
And they are after how much? LOL
A federal prison feeds you well and you will get to know more people and do it right the next time!

Laugh with me,heck!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1XCf9gEu7E

[alex70olds]

great, now, give me all the contact info of endusers who are on this list...

dn, here's a code

who was it bought from (reseller),
when was it used?
to what server did it connect to?

53286908418324

last of all who actually bought that code? oh wait, you need a rat, dontcha...still, have at it :)

lmao you don't think they have informants? The spend millions investigating signal theft, and have many CI's on their payroll.

[ShotGun]

Payroll,,,, I need sum of dat,,,, heck I`ll lie and give them dead peeps names..... what you say,,, Mo Money Mo Money Mo Money Mo!

[ShotGun]

Alex is like the Obama health care,you are aware of the Hippa law ,well do some research, then you have IRS, do some research,now for Oliver North, as long as you can answer without giving them an answer you WIN!
Heck it happens everyday!
What does that amount to.

Mo Money , Mo Money, Mo Money , MO!

[ShotGun]

Love ya Bro,, light at every tunnel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=672Uod0X-1g

Never did like an ambulance chaser,nor does a Fed Judge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[missclinton]

lmao you don't think they have informants? The spend millions investigating signal theft, and have many CI's on their payroll.

lol not like ididnt know as much..so, how many are registered here, ya think? it wasnt a CI who went after wuf however..or do you KNOW SOMETHING I DONT.. ;)

[alex70olds]

lol not like ididnt know as much..so, how many are registered here, ya think? it wasnt a CI who went after wuf however..or do you KNOW SOMETHING I DONT.. ;)

Wuff and other resellers were easy targets. Yes, it was investigators that purchased the codes from Wvff, then the dominoes rolled. Accepting PayPal makes it easy for them. I don't know how many CI's are here, at least two, can pretty much guarantee a few more.

[missclinton]

lmao you don't think they have informants? The spend millions investigating signal theft, and have many CI's on their payroll.

splain why they havent served the thousands upon thousands of end users who loaded bins/files, over the years who also bought hardware online via FTA sites on and on, rtember the glory days when everything was public? where were the CI's then??...this is simply another attempt...sure the RESELLER aspect makes this unique...i would go as far as to say THEY DO have a case against resellers but i draw the line when they make claims VIA the DMCA that an end user is the culprit for this scheme..ludicrous

[ShotGun]

Thats the problem you don`t know,, and telling you would be telling everyone,what the hello do you think?
I would speculate he got pinched and turned over, now does that make seance? Or shall I spell it out for you?
Not to the best of my recalculation!LOL give me a dang break pal! Use your mind,you do have a drivers license right?

[missclinton]

Wuff and other resellers were easy targets. Yes, it was investigators that purchased the codes from Wvff, then the dominoes rolled. Accepting PayPal makes it easy for them. I don't know how many CI's are here, at least two, can pretty much guarantee a few more.

ya think rm became one of them?

[missclinton]

Thats the problem you don`t know,, and telling you would be telling everyone,what the hello do you think?
I would speculate he got pinched and turned over, now does that make seance? Or shall I spell it out for you?
Not to the best of my recalculation!LOL give me a dang break pal! Use your mind,you do have a drivers license right?

sorry its just i dont get your lingo, man lol

[ShotGun]

splain why they havent served the thousands upon thousands of end users who loaded bins/files, over the years who also bought hardware online via FTA sites on and on, rtember the glory days when everything was public? where were the CI's then??...this is simply another attempt...sure the RESELLER aspect makes this unique...i would go as far as to say THEY DO have a case against resellers but i draw the line when they make claims VIA the DMCA that an end user is the culprit for this scheme..ludicrous
Is FTA legal. Yep,do some home work on how Charles got started in his business, then do your homework on what his parents did for a living, now watch his commercials against direct tv, its all a farce,what does he want to be on TV in the "Shark Tank"?
The man is raising prices!
Bin files, did you download them using your ip?
Do you know what a vpn is or how to mask your mac address?
Now you may have a case of shrink dink?

[ShotGun]

Now for the real story,hes catching peeps with transactions,such as paypal, that said nark gave them because he kept records, so now hes not having to pay for his actions other than taking the end users 3500 dollar effect, take them to court and do not agree with their statement as you will pay for their travel and stay, you have rights,BY GAWD!
Its their problem to prove you wrong!

[ShotGun]

sorry its just i dont get your lingo, man lol

I have a parable in everything said,something you should learn!~

[missclinton]

Is FTA legal. Yep,do some home work on how Charles got started in his business, then do your homework on what his parents did for a living, now watch his commercials against direct tv, its all a farce,what does he want to be on TV in the "Shark Tank"?
The man is raising prices!
Bin files, did you download them using your ip?
Do you know what a vpn is or how to mask your mac address?
Now you may have a case of shrink dink?


thats cool, so now ask their attorneys how they can claim those FTA irds are ILLEGAL?? oh wait they confiscated the hardware from your home and took them to their lab and deemed them illegal cuz they saw those bins, that ILLEGAL FTA receiver was altered with and loading SW, right? or did they? hmmm that is the conumdrum, no? they cant prove DICK... lol

[ShotGun]

When dealing in a court of law in a fed court, you do not have to answer their question as they ask it.
Good gosh watch the news if you don`t want to study!

[missclinton]

When dealing in a court of law in a fed court, you do not have to answer their question as they ask it.
Good gosh watch the news if you don`t want to study!

i are begins to got your gist.. i hopes?
good gravy

[alex70olds]

ya think rm became one of them?

He agreed to something lol.

20253

[ShotGun]

thats cool, so now ask their attorneys how they can claim those FTA irds are ILLEGAL?? oh wait they confiscated the hardware from your home and took them to their lab and deemed them illegal cuz they saw those bins, that ILLEGAL FTA receiver was altered with and loading SW, right? or did they? hmmm that is the conumdrum, no? they cant prove DICK... lol

Would you allow a stranger to open your door? I would shoot without question!
Nor would I go into someone house.
Do you have a magnet?
Put it on your hd,
Or shoot your hd.
Or use a hammer!
Or if your dog barks and the light comes on.Break your hd
A fta box is NOT ILLEGAL and no daum Judge is going to give a spoenioa to break into your home for the THOUGHT YOU MAY be using something illegal!
Daum you can grow pot in your house,just don`t tell anyone!

[ShotGun]

Look pal I am not going to start, but if you or anyone else breaks in my house your shot and bit by my dogs!
Now in a court of law do you know they have to tell you 3 times we have a search warrant before entry?

[missclinton]

He agreed to something lol.

20253

that is for sure

[missclinton]

costs and hassles are too much to take to criminal courts against end users...none of them (charges)(buying a code) would stand up, and only need to be told ONce by your dogs to steer clear of bite...

[ShotGun]

i are begins to got your gist.. i hopes?
good gravy

Gravy comes from oil and flower, if your a chief its called a rue, now with that said your know I can cook.
Your bring me down and I shall not escalate,Be happy and learn with research,I already gave you food for thought!
Not being rude but I dont allow naw sayers to make me explain squat!Listen to this and allow it to enrich!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3HQMbQAWRc

[ShotGun]

Alex clean this fella up for me.

[PatriotTV]

very interesting debate... good info and advise, keep it up man!

[sodusme]

Or you can just throw up one of these on your property....

20332

[30cal]

This is one i have posted20355

[ImissDAVE]

First off, if you're in front of a judge you already lost because it cost you time and money.
Secondly, In a civil court the burden of proof rests on the balance of probabilities rather than "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt"
So although your defense is commendable, the judge will wink and nod at the Dishnet Lawyers before pounding his gavel and yelling "Guilty!"