Forget Class action

[TNF]

first i need to say im late getting in on that hanni thread, though there wer quite a few heavies at it prob best it stayed that way..but b4 i get to my point re: his thread..id like to make a few observations on some replies

all i know is, i wouldnt wnat to live in stoneycreek area these days and Dracco or the realphoenix was quite the show to watch at DC - back then thats when peeps began to realize after binz closed doors just how effed up this was getting

i have never met or known the heavies except for what i have read in all my times in this lost hobby but reading that thread made me realize how many have left it and how few are left...to do what? will never know..to reel in endusers to then turn them over to dn's puppets (lawyers)..is as far-fetched as it gets

so to the point about a class action against jj is all good in theory but belongs in a fiction novel cuz in these cases a lawyer a REAL attorney would NEVER take it on despite the allure and the industry heavies involved..it would make great reading in the cold winter months like these but if all hanni had was a pipe dream?? heck i have a few of my own but i digress

again, while many of us agree that these 3500.00 extortion letters are being served and some are falling prey? whether some of the heavies (in fta) have anything to do with it? we'll never know but i doubt they are the one's feeding jj...i like good ole legal actions and i was hoping hanni had something to sink my teeth in , alas, nothing, per usual. mistrust though can make one throw accusations around willy nilly, esp after puffin on a doob..like im about to do..to kill the pain, mind, NO other reasons... ;)

[alex70olds]

Lol first and last mistake, actually believing anything HL posts. He came along way too late in the game and is easily manipulated by those "heavy hitters".

[Hannibalector]

Lol first and last mistake, actually believing anything HL posts. He came along way too late in the game and is easily manipulated by those "heavy hitters".

/me waves to Mr alex

[alex70olds]

/me waves to Mr alex

lol /me waves back to HL.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

The question to be asked is what would be the basis for the class action suit ? This type of class action was filled already against Dave alleging the letters amounted to extortion and the court...

[wattso99]

They took me to court and it cost me $4000 but I won I didn't pay their $3500
All because i bought a card reader for someone else.

Hello GS been a long time since the old PD days and risestar



The $4000 was lawyers fee.

[Nostradamus]

interesting but couldn't you have counter-sued at that point for court costs incurred?

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

interesting but couldn't you have counter-sued at that point for court costs incurred?


The case was originally won by Dave and than later it went to California Court of Appeal where that court upheld the ruling in favor of Dave.


Dave was the defendant and won therefore having the right to seek court costs for their legal expenses.


Here is a link to the decision on appeal


hxxp://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1445531.html.



I attached the lower court ruling.



GS2

[Hannibalector]

first i need to say im late getting in on that hanni thread, though there wer quite a few heavies at it prob best it stayed that way..but b4 i get to my point re: his thread..id like to make a few observations on some replies

all i know is, i wouldnt wnat to live in stoneycreek area these days and Dracco or the realphoenix was quite the show to watch at DC - back then thats when peeps began to realize after binz closed doors just how effed up this was getting

i have never met or known the heavies except for what i have read in all my times in this lost hobby but reading that thread made me realize how many have left it and how few are left...to do what? will never know..to reel in endusers to then turn them over to dn's puppets (lawyers)..is as far-fetched as it gets

so to the point about a class action against jj is all good in theory but belongs in a fiction novel cuz in these cases a lawyer a REAL attorney would NEVER take it on despite the allure and the industry heavies involved..it would make great reading in the cold winter months like these but if all hanni had was a pipe dream?? heck i have a few of my own but i digress

again, while many of us agree that these 3500.00 extortion letters are being served and some are falling prey? whether some of the heavies (in fta) have anything to do with it? we'll never know but i doubt they are the one's feeding jj...i like good ole legal actions and i was hoping hanni had something to sink my teeth in , alas, nothing, per usual. mistrust though can make one throw accusations around willy nilly, esp after puffin on a doob..like im about to do..to kill the pain, mind, NO other reasons... ;)


try to get it right class action demand letter equal to Hagan Noll and Boyles

[Hannibalector]

lol /me waves back to HL.

Alex would you consider a interview with Neil Chenoweth ??

[Hannibalector]

there are a lot more persons to consider in a true interview as to the past that can reveal the truth that need to establish the piracy

[Anubis]

Alex would you consider a interview with Neil Chenoweth ??


there are a lot more persons to consider in a true interview as to the past that can reveal the truth that need to establish the piracy

What are you looking for????
You seem to open mouth but don't show anything.

[Hannibalector]

What are you looking for????
You seem to open mouth but don't show anything.

Anubis I'm always looking for the truth regardless, I look for the history and all it has to offer, documenting the history is what is most important to me, I have had discussions with lawyers to a good many things and to those things have been met with a good deal of ridicule such as here, the most important thing to what we all want is to effect change and the only way we can do that is to fight back, I talked to Fred Raud on the phone almost 2 years ago now as I thought him Brooke Hill, Stephany, Bob Ward Phil Allison and Jung Kwak would make an interesting part 2 to Neil's book Murdoch's Pirates, that only scratches the surface to what transpired over the years with regards to the evolution of pirate tv, theres so much more involved to this story that the public should know, the corruption of the corporation and the lawyers and entities behind the corruption, IMO like Hagan Noll and Boyle along with JJ Gee the mirror copy of John Norris and his cohorts for NDS, there is a story to tell and it will be told

[sodusme]

Anubis I'm always looking for the truth regardless, I look for the history and all it has to offer, documenting the history is what is most important to me, I have had discussions with lawyers to a good many things and to those things have been met with a good deal of ridicule such as here, the most important thing to what we all want is to effect change and the only way we can do that is to fight back, I talked to Fred Raud on the phone almost 2 years ago now as I thought him Brooke Hill, Stephany, Bob Ward Phil Allison and Jung Kwak would make an interesting part 2 to Neil's book Murdoch's Pirates, that only scratches the surface to what transpired over the years with regards to the evolution of pirate tv, theres so much more involved to this story that the public should know, the corruption of the corporation and the lawyers and entities behind the corruption, IMO like Hagan Noll and Boyle along with JJ Gee the mirror copy of John Norris and his cohorts for NDS, there is a story to tell and it will be told

I agree with the corruption and it starts at the court level. I always thought Fred Raud to be an interesting character. I have talked with him at length in PM's and the only reason was I wanted to know "why"? In other words I was interested in hearing what happened directly from the horses mouth. I don't know too much about other players in that game other then what I have read here and there. I was mostly interested in why people hated Fred so much so I asked him. LOL.

But I agree with the corruption and seedy side of pay tv is running rampant over the little guy. Its getting where just because you have a ton of money and can afford litigation you can sue for any damn thing your heart desires. I don't agree with that and I think you are somewhat like me in that you don't either.

[Nostradamus]

But I agree with the corruption and seedy side of pay tv is running rampant over the little guy. Its getting where just because you have a ton of money and can afford litigation you can sue for any damn thing your heart desires. I don't agree with that and I think you are somewhat like me in that you don't either.

that only comes into play when they can't bribe some politician to change laws even more in their favor

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Anubis I'm always looking for the truth regardless, I look for the history and all it has to offer, documenting the history is what is most important to me, I have had discussions with lawyers to a good many things and to those things have been met with a good deal of ridicule such as here, the most important thing to what we all want is to effect change and the only way we can do that is to fight back, I talked to Fred Raud on the phone almost 2 years ago now as I thought him Brooke Hill, Stephany, Bob Ward Phil Allison and Jung Kwak would make an interesting part 2 to Neil's book Murdoch's Pirates, that only scratches the surface to what transpired over the years with regards to the evolution of pirate tv, theres so much more involved to this story that the public should know, the corruption of the corporation and the lawyers and entities behind the corruption, IMO like Hagan Noll and Boyle along with JJ Gee the mirror copy of John Norris and his cohorts for NDS, there is a story to tell and it will be told


I know your very stoked with this stuff but only my opinion but I do not think the public at large is very interested in lawyer tactics or Corporations tactics going after people who they allege pirates their signals. There is a huge big world out there I believe with the view stop your whining on your treatment if you got caught, don't pirate, pay for them like I do and you won't have legal problems next time. You saying the lawyers were mean the Corporations use dirty tricks would have this huge other world out there say tough **** with little sympathy I think. If true would you really be that surprise to learn that. ?


You can figure out what **** was.




GS2

[sodusme]

I know your very stoked with this stuff but only my opinion but I do not think the public at large is very interested in lawyer tactics or Corporations tactics going after people who they allege pirates their signals. There is a huge big world out there I believe with the view stop your whining on your treatment if you got caught, don't pirate, pay for them like I do and you won't have legal problems next time. You saying the lawyers were mean the Corporations use dirty tricks would have this huge other world out there say tough **** with little sympathy I think. If true would you really be that surprise to learn that. ?


You can figure out what **** was.




GS2

I know you addressed that to Hani but I'll throw in my take on it just to keep the discussion going. My big gripe on this is that they were allowed to get a ruling from a judge stating a bin is a "device". A bin is not a device. Its simply "code" binary code at that with 0's and 1's and possibly some ASCII code thrown in I can't remember and its been forever since I viewed a bin in a hex editor. But that ruling was ridiculous to make a bin an "entity" of itself and make mere possession illegal and the only way they got away with it is they have M O N E Y. Nothing more. That is what I despise is that they get crap rulings from judges who don't know any better.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I know you addressed that to Hani but I'll throw in my take on it just to keep the discussion going. My big gripe on this is that they were allowed to get a ruling from a judge stating a bin is a "device". A bin is not a device. Its simply "code" binary code at that with 0's and 1's and possibly some ASCII code thrown in I can't remember and its been forever since I viewed a bin in a hex editor. But that ruling was ridiculous to make a bin an "entity" of itself and make mere possession illegal and the only way they got away with it is they have M O N E Y. Nothing more. That is what I despise is that they get crap rulings from judges who don't know any better.


The ruling was that software was considered to be a device. It was brought up by a defendant being TDG who argued it did not apply to 47 U.S.C. §605(e)(4) that than forced a ruling on it.





Plaintiffs argue that Ward’s same behavior (as they allege under the DMCA) of
distributing piracy software files for FTA receivers similarly violates the Communications
Act, 47 U.S.C. §605(e)(4). Ward argues that 47 U.S.C. §605(e)(4) does not cover the
distribution of piracy software.

2
Section 605(e)(4) of the communications Act provides:
Any person who manufactures, assembles, modifies, imports, exports, sells, or
distributes any electronic, mechanical, or other device or equipment, knowing or
having reason to know that the device or equipment is primarily of assistance in the
unauthorized decryption of satellite cable programming, or direct-to-home satellite
services, or is intended for any other activity prohibited by subsection (a) of this
section, shall be fined not more than $500,000 for each violation, or imprisoned for
not more than 5 years for each violation, or both. For purposes of all penalties and
remedies established for violations of this paragraph, the prohibited activity
established herein as it applies to each such device shall be deemed a separate violation.
47 U.S.C. §605(e)(4) (emphasis added). Subsection (a) prohibits persons from receiving or
assisting in receiving, without authorization, subscription-based satellite television
programming such as DISH Network. 47 U.S.C. §605(a). Plaintiffs argue that Ward’s
piracy software is both a “device” and “equipment” prohibited by section 605(e)(4).
Defendant disagrees. It appears that this is a matter of first impression.3
Case 8:08-cv-00590-JSM-TBM Document 77 Filed 01/08/2010 Page 12 of 17

3(...continued)
the issue of whether §605(e)(4) applied to software was not brought to the court’s attention. Id.
Page 13 of 17
Plaintiffs argue in their reply that the ordinary meaning of the phrase “electronic,
mechanical, or other device or equipment” encompasses Ward’s piracy software. Plaintiffs
also point the Court to related statutes that support application of Section 605(e)(4) to piracy
software. Plaintiffs also note that the United States Department of Justice has successfully
prosecuted numerous satellite pirates involved in writing and distributing illicit software
pursuant to section 605(e)(4) of the Communications Act.

The Court concludes that section 605(e)(4) covers piracy software. The Court agrees
that the plain meaning of the terms “device” and “equipment” include software. See
Dictionary.com Unabridged (Random House, Inc.), http://dictionary.reference.com (last
visited Jan. 7, 2010) (defining “device” as “a thing made for a particular purpose; an
invention or contrivance, esp. a mechanical or electrical one” and defining “equipment” as
“anything kept, furnished, or provided for a specific purpose”). The Court also finds it
significant that Section 153(45) of the Communications Act, which is applicable to all of
Chapter 5 concerning wire and radio communications, which includes section 605(e)(4),
defines “telecommunications equipment” to include “software integral to such equipment.”
47 U.S.C. §153(45).
Case 8:08-cv-00590-JSM-TBM Document 77 Filed 01/08/2010 Page 13 of 17
4 See Fla. Stat. §§812.15(1)(c), (2)(a); Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. §§910(a)-(e); Del. Code Ann. Tit.
11, §§850(a)-(e); Md. Code Ann. §§7-313(c), 7-315, 7-318; Va. Code Ann. §§ 18.2-190.2-190.8.
Page 14 of 17
Lastly, the Court is persuaded by Plaintiffs’ identification of several state statutes4
modeled after section 605(e)(4), which support a plain meaning of “device” that includes
software and by the fact that the distribution of piracy software is prosecuted under section
605(e)(4).
As set forth herein, the record is undisputed that Ward distributed piracy software on
internet websites. The record also reflects that Ward knew that the software was primarily
of assistance in the unauthorized decryption of the DISH Network signal. Accordingly,
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count III of the Amended Complaint is
granted.




GS2

[kutter]

I know you addressed that to Hani but I'll throw in my take on it just to keep the discussion going. My big gripe on this is that they were allowed to get a ruling from a judge stating a bin is a "device". A bin is not a device. Its simply "code" binary code at that with 0's and 1's and possibly some ASCII code thrown in I can't remember and its been forever since I viewed a bin in a hex editor. But that ruling was ridiculous to make a bin an "entity" of itself and make mere possession illegal and the only way they got away with it is they have M O N E Y. Nothing more. That is what I despise is that they get crap rulings from judges who don't know any better.

do you feel the same way about a digital picture :)

there is no doubt that it's just a bunch of 0's and 1's but those zeroes and ones are arranged a specific way for a purpose ... so it's not as cut and dried as you're suggesting ... take for example kiddy porn ... I mean the same argument could be applied to digital picture so should that be allowed as a defense ... I know the example is a bit extreme but it goes without saying that machine code can be used for illegal purposes and in my opinion, shouldn't be exempt from our laws simply because it's not a tangible item.

[sodusme]

do you feel the same way about a digital picture :)

there is no doubt that it's just a bunch of 0's and 1's but those zeroes and ones are arranged a specific way for a purpose ... so it's not as cut and dried as you're suggesting ... take for example kiddy porn ... I mean the same argument could be applied to digital picture so should that be allowed as a defense ... I know the example is a bit extreme but it goes without saying that machine code can be used for illegal purposes and in my opinion, shouldn't be exempt from our laws simply because it's not a tangible item.

I actually do feel the same about anything digital. Yes very true a digital picture is only 0's and 1's and yes they are arranged in such a way that they form a picture. However when is it that they are actually a "picture"? In other words its not until they are all assembled in a certain manner that they equate to the end result of a picture. I guess the same could be said of abortion. When is abortion abortion? Is it when the fetus is conceived? Is it when it takes shape or form? When is a "baby" a baby? Same kind of argument.

A bin is merely 0's and 1's and until which time as it actually "functions" i.e. in a legal or illegal fashion it is still "just" 0's and 1's. That is why I say that was a ridiculous ruling. Plus think about how many bins Coolsat put out that that were "dead" right out of the gate. How can those "bins" be considered piracy devices? Hell they don't even work. LOL They didn't do anything except maybe give you access to features that you already had access to. So where is the piracy with those "devices"? Its two fold not only does the bin have to be considered a "device" BUT it has to be capable of piracy to hold true under this statute. I can guarantee you that MANY a Coolsat customer was NOT engaged in piracy with their bins 'cause I used to field complaints as "staff" at an FTA site. Those bins never worked from the time they were released.

[Condor]

I actually do feel the same about anything digital. Yes very true a digital picture is only 0's and 1's and yes they are arranged in such a way that they form a picture. However when is it that they are actually a "picture"? In other words its not until they are all assembled in a certain manner that they equate to the end result of a picture. I guess the same could be said of abortion. When is abortion abortion? Is it when the fetus is conceived? Is it when it takes shape or form? When is a "baby" a baby? Same kind of argument.

A bin is merely 0's and 1's and until which time as it actually "functions" i.e. in a legal or illegal fashion it is still "just" 0's and 1's. That is why I say that was a ridiculous ruling. Plus think about how many bins Coolsat put out that that were "dead" right out of the gate. How can those "bins" be considered piracy devices? Hell they don't even work. LOL They didn't do anything except maybe give you access to features that you already had access to. So where is the piracy with those "devices"? Its two fold not only does the bin have to be considered a "device" BUT it has to be capable of piracy to hold true under this statute. I can guarantee you that MANY a Coolsat customer was NOT engaged in piracy with their bins 'cause I used to field complaints as "staff" at an FTA site. Those bins never worked from the time they were released.
Boolean Algebra...Lol......

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I actually do feel the same about anything digital. Yes very true a digital picture is only 0's and 1's and yes they are arranged in such a way that they form a picture. However when is it that they are actually a "picture"? In other words its not until they are all assembled in a certain manner that they equate to the end result of a picture. I guess the same could be said of abortion. When is abortion abortion? Is it when the fetus is conceived? Is it when it takes shape or form? When is a "baby" a baby? Same kind of argument.

A bin is merely 0's and 1's and until which time as it actually "functions" i.e. in a legal or illegal fashion it is still "just" 0's and 1's. That is why I say that was a ridiculous ruling. Plus think about how many bins Coolsat put out that that were "dead" right out of the gate. How can those "bins" be considered piracy devices? Hell they don't even work. LOL They didn't do anything except maybe give you access to features that you already had access to. So where is the piracy with those "devices"? Its two fold not only does the bin have to be considered a "device" BUT it has to be capable of piracy to hold true under this statute. I can guarantee you that MANY a Coolsat customer was NOT engaged in piracy with their bins 'cause I used to field complaints as "staff" at an FTA site. Those bins never worked from the time they were released.


Bins that were posted for download were designed or the purpose was to be used in a legal fashion ? If that is the case why didn't all the manufacturers like Coolsat, Viewsat, SonicView Etc just post them on their own web sites instead of posting all these disclaimers warning of their illegal use of third party bins. ?



GS2

[kutter]

I actually do feel the same about anything digital. Yes very true a digital picture is only 0's and 1's and yes they are arranged in such a way that they form a picture. However when is it that they are actually a "picture"? In other words its not until they are all assembled in a certain manner that they equate to the end result of a picture. I guess the same could be said of abortion. When is abortion abortion? Is it when the fetus is conceived? Is it when it takes shape or form? When is a "baby" a baby? Same kind of argument.

A bin is merely 0's and 1's and until which time as it actually "functions" i.e. in a legal or illegal fashion it is still "just" 0's and 1's. That is why I say that was a ridiculous ruling. Plus think about how many bins Coolsat put out that that were "dead" right out of the gate. How can those "bins" be considered piracy devices? Hell they don't even work. LOL They didn't do anything except maybe give you access to features that you already had access to. So where is the piracy with those "devices"? Its two fold not only does the bin have to be considered a "device" BUT it has to be capable of piracy to hold true under this statute. I can guarantee you that MANY a Coolsat customer was NOT engaged in piracy with their bins 'cause I used to field complaints as "staff" at an FTA site. Those bins never worked from the time they were released.

How far would you take that line of thought ?

Would that extend to anyone that writes software for legal purposes ?

We all know that software or firmware is useless without the hardware to utilize it. I think that people that write code should be held accountable for their work, whether it's legal or illegal. If I buy something I expect the firmware to function properly and I'm pretty sure everyone would agree with that statement. If we're prepared to make companies accountable for their products (both hardware and software) how can you argue that the software should be exempt ?

[1boxman]

How far would you take that line of thought ?

Would that extend to anyone that writes software for legal purposes ?

We all know that software or firmware is useless without the hardware to utilize it. I think that people that write code should be held accountable for their work, whether it's legal or illegal. If I buy something I expect the firmware to function properly and I'm pretty sure everyone would agree with that statement. If we're prepared to make companies accountable for their products (both hardware and software) how can you argue that the software should be exempt ?

Well... that is kinda like making the people that built your car accountable for any problems and not the manufacture .

How about making the people who voted Obama in accountable .

[sodusme]

Bins that were posted for download were designed or the purpose was to be used in a legal fashion ? If that is the case why didn't all the manufacturers like Coolsat, Viewsat, SonicView Etc just post them on their own web sites instead of posting all these disclaimers warning of their illegal use of third party bins. ?



GS2

I think their main concern was that the bin be loaded for the purpose of receiving D/N programming. Not so much that you actually were in "possession" of a bin or that you actually "loaded" a bin but expressly that it was used to receive D/N programming. As I remember reading those warnings on their sites and they explicitly said they would not "support" your use of a bin to receive illegal D/N programming. So even the manufacturers knew that for the bin to be useful it would have to be used in a manner to aid in the receiving of programming. Hence is why I bring up the argument about the Coolsat bins. I would wager to say that maybe 33% of their bins actually worked. The other 67% were crap and didn't aid anyone in receiving any programming at all.


How far would you take that line of thought ?

Would that extend to anyone that writes software for legal purposes ?

We all know that software or firmware is useless without the hardware to utilize it. I think that people that write code should be held accountable for their work, whether it's legal or illegal. If I buy something I expect the firmware to function properly and I'm pretty sure everyone would agree with that statement. If we're prepared to make companies accountable for their products (both hardware and software) how can you argue that the software should be exempt ?

Because like you said the software is nothing without the hardware.

Look at how many sites out there are telling folks how to make a bomb? Now its not a "bomb" until you put everything together right. What if you put everything together and it resembles a bomb---but it doesn't work? Is it still a "bomb"? No of course it isn't. The ingredients are nothing until they actually function. The same analogy holds true here---those 0's and 1's are nothing until they actually function. That functionality must provide you with illegal TV or the argument of that code being used for "piracy" is out the window.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I think their main concern was that the bin be loaded for the purpose of receiving D/N programming. Not so much that you actually were in "possession" of a bin or that you actually "loaded" a bin but expressly that it was used to receive D/N programming. As I remember reading those warnings on their sites and they explicitly said they would not "support" your use of a bin to receive illegal D/N programming. So even the manufacturers knew that for the bin to be useful it would have to be used in a manner to aid in the receiving of programming. Hence is why I bring up the argument about the Coolsat bins. I would wager to say that maybe 33% of their bins actually worked. The other 67% were crap and didn't aid anyone in receiving any programming at all.


The only concern and purpose of the disclaimers were to put on an act they their hands were clean and they were operating a legal business except they put out the bins to begin with plus the receivers contained propriety code and data belonging to Nagra. The disclaimers were an attempt to distant themselves from the piracy that they knew was going on.




Plaintiffs not only present evidence that the Sonicview Defendants distributed the
necessary equipment to intercept DISH Network’s satellite signal, but also that the Sonicview
Defendants knew or at least had reasons to know the devices were capable of being used for
piracy purposes. This is evident from the fact that Sonicview attempted to disclaim liability for
satellite piracy using Sonicview devices, and Sonicview customers often returned Sonicview
receivers with piracy software installed. See Columbia Cable TV Co., Inc. v. McCary, 954 F.
Supp. 124, 127 (D.S.C. 1996) (“[T]he court finds that the disclaimer demonstrates knowledge of
the most probable if not only use of the devices.”); see also Comcast of Ill. X v. Multi-Vision
Elecs., Inc., 491 F.3d 938, 947 (9th Cir. 2007) (reaching a similar conclusion but for the
purposes of enhancing damages).




GS2

[kutter]

Well... that is kinda like making the people that built your car accountable for any problems and not the manufacture .

How about making the people who voted Obama in accountable .

Not really, because the people that built my car are employed by the manufacturer. It's more like holding a third party accountable for any modifications they did to my car. Something we all would do :)

[kutter]

Because like you said the software is nothing without the hardware.

Look at how many sites out there are telling folks how to make a bomb? Now its not a "bomb" until you put everything together right. What if you put everything together and it resembles a bomb---but it doesn't work? Is it still a "bomb"? No of course it isn't. The ingredients are nothing until they actually function. The same analogy holds true here---those 0's and 1's are nothing until they actually function. That functionality must provide you with illegal TV or the argument of that code being used for "piracy" is out the window.

We see things from a different perspective I guess. I don't see how you can suggest that someone who writes software shouldn't be accountable for their product. Anyone writing software that runs on specific hardware shouldn't be exempt from law simply because they didn't create the computer or device needed for it to function.

Like I asked you, where do you draw the line ?

Is it alright to write viruses ?

How about just an outright scam ? Sell software that simply doesn't work ?

[bigbadbrother]

This whole tread seams to be going around in circles, these are issues only a high court can decide on and a patent attorney to argue it's points.

[kutter]

This whole tread seams to be going around in circles, these are issues only a high court can decide on and a patent attorney to argue it's points.

no need for an attorney, the courts have already ruled that a coder is accountable for their 1's and 0's :)

[bigbadbrother]

no need for an attorney, the courts have already ruled that a coder is accountable for their 1's and 0's :)

What courts? big difference in the court.

[sodusme]

We see things from a different perspective I guess. I don't see how you can suggest that someone who writes software shouldn't be accountable for their product. Anyone writing software that runs on specific hardware shouldn't be exempt from law simply because they didn't create the computer or device needed for it to function.

Like I asked you, where do you draw the line ?

Is it alright to write viruses ?

How about just an outright scam ? Sell software that simply doesn't work ?

Well to fully understand my perspective you have to understand what I engage in. I won't spell it out so's not to scare any members that may not be familiar with how I pass my time but it involves "circumvention" of websites. That's to put it nicely and I won't elaborate on it. So IMHO everything digital is up for grabs. Now I won't go knock off a liquor store but if its a game, program, login, or network and you are worried about it being "pirated" or "broken" into (as D/N and Nagra are) than my suggestion to you is to secure it better. I can think of half a dozen ways to do away with IKS right now, or at least cripple it--yet D/N and Nagra refuse to. They are only interested in having the court system whittle away at our amendments and pass more and more "laws" and "restrictions". Lets face it when the court decides on something the resulting litigators who seek recompense from that verdict take a mile. Do you think that the laws that the NSA is using right now originally started with the open ended spying that is going on? I can assure you they did not. It was a law that was passed and the govt. capitalized on it and has run with the ball. The same holds true here. D/N and Nagra were given some rulings early on in the IKS game and what has happened? They have come out with lawsuit after lawsuit capitalizing on those rulings, and in turn taking a bigger bite of the cookie with each lawsuit.

Mark my words eventually there will be a ruling that the FTA forums that you and are enjoying right now, and have the freedom of speech to be carrying on this conversation on will be ruled "illegal" in some way, shape or form. They will cease to exist, and it will come about because D/N and Nagra had an ill informed judge make a ruling.

[bigbadbrother]

This whole tread seams to be going around in circles, these are issues only a high court can decide on and a patent attorney to argue it's points.

Dang it, I got sucked in to this thread.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Well to fully understand my perspective you have to understand what I engage in. I won't spell it out so's not to scare any members that may not be familiar with how I pass my time but it involves "circumvention" of websites. That's to put it nicely and I won't elaborate on it. So IMHO everything digital is up for grabs. Now I won't go knock off a liquor store but if its a game, program, login, or network and you are worried about it being "pirated" or "broken" into (as D/N and Nagra are) than my suggestion to you is to secure it better. I can think of half a dozen ways to do away with IKS right now, or at least cripple it--yet D/N and Nagra refuse to. They are only interested in having the court system whittle away at our amendments and pass more and more "laws" and "restrictions". Lets face it when the court decides on something the resulting litigators who seek recompense from that verdict take a mile. Do you think that the laws that the NSA is using right now originally started with the open ended spying that is going on? I can assure you they did not. It was a law that was passed and the govt. capitalized on it and has run with the ball. The same holds true here. D/N and Nagra were given some rulings early on in the IKS game and what has happened? They have come out with lawsuit after lawsuit capitalizing on those rulings, and in turn taking a bigger bite of the cookie with each lawsuit.

Mark my words eventually there will be a ruling that the FTA forums that you and are enjoying right now, and have the freedom of speech to be carrying on this conversation on will be ruled "illegal" in some way, shape or form. They will cease to exist, and it will come about because D/N and Nagra had an ill informed judge make a ruling.


The providers have not passed any new laws or restrictions. The laws are not new. Its not surprising to me that courts have ruled in their favor when the evidence has shown that the defendants were in conflict with the law.


Judges are not ill informed. The big companies like Viewsat and all, all have good representation. The hard cold fact is that the law was not on their side when the evidence was provided. They themselves provided the evidence because they couldn't conceal it when it came to doing business or not.


FTA forums have been taken down so if one goes down it won't be anything new. It won't be because of conversation but having bins, files and instructions on how to pirate the provider's signals as than the allegation will be assisting others to violate the law in pirating their signal unlawfully.



GS2

[sodusme]

The providers have not passed any new laws or restrictions. The laws are not new. Its not surprising to me that courts have ruled in their favor when the evidence has shown that the defendants were in conflict with the law.


Judges are not ill informed. The big companies like Viewsat and all, all have good representation. The hard cold fact is that the law was not on their side when the evidence was provided. They themselves provided the evidence because they couldn't conceal it when it came to doing business or not.


FTA forums have been taken down so if one goes down it won't be anything new. It won't be because of conversation but having bins, files and instructions on how to pirate the provider's signals as than the allegation will be assisting others to violate the law in pirating their signal unlawfully.



GS2

What I'm saying is they have used these vague and loosely interpreted laws and twisted them to suit themselves. Take for instance the act of ordering a "code" via Paypal. That was never a "conflict of law" and still shouldn't be to this day IMO. D/N and Nagra have managed to introduce that into a courtroom and get an ill informed judge to side with them in saying that that is now against the law to purchase a code from someone. So where they started in the past of going after Kwak and TDG and the coders what are they doing now? They are going after the end user. Like I said give them an "inch" in a ruling and they will take a mile.

Look around these FTA forums and than tell me how certain you are that they will last another 5 years. I can all but guarantee you that they will not. Its just another "ruling" waiting for D/N and Nagra to get decided on in a court of law. Not to be a smart @ss but the majority of the discussions in the Nfusion, Neobox and Jynxbox forums are just that--instructions on how to "pirate" the providers signal (via IKS instead of bins). Now I'm not trying to play advocate here for the providers but its obvious they will eventually go after these forums. They are simply going right down the chain of command from the manufacturers, to the coders, to the end users. What do you think will be next? ;)

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

What I'm saying is they have used these vague and loosely interpreted laws and twisted them to suit themselves. Take for instance the act of ordering a "code" via Paypal. That was never a "conflict of law" and still shouldn't be to this day IMO. D/N and Nagra have managed to introduce that into a courtroom and get an ill informed judge to side with them in saying that that is now against the law to purchase a code from someone. So where they started in the past of going after Kwak and TDG and the coders what are they doing now? They are going after the end user. Like I said give them an "inch" in a ruling and they will take a mile.

Look around these FTA forums and than tell me how certain you are that they will last another 5 years. I can all but guarantee you that they will not. Its just another "ruling" waiting for D/N and Nagra to get decided on in a court of law. Not to be a smart @ss but the majority of the discussions in the Nfusion, Neobox and Jynxbox forums are just that--instructions on how to "pirate" the providers signal (via IKS instead of bins). Now I'm not trying to play advocate here for the providers but its obvious they will eventually go after these forums. They are simply going right down the chain of command from the manufacturers, to the coders, to the end users. What do you think will be next? ;)



I don't see it that way. End users went to court in Dave cases and won on interpretation of a law. Was that ruling by an ill informed Judge ?


I just don't think you have accepted that the law and the actions by defendants favor them in most cases. Its not some ill informed Judge that it happens nor was it when the end users won.


As far as now going after the end user its not new to go after end users. Go back and look at the Dave end user cases.


As far as going after forums again its nothing new. Sites have been taken down going back many years now.




Court Rules DirecTV Must Prove More than Possession




Based on arguments made by civil liberties group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and attorney Albert Zakarian for defendant Mike Treworgy, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that DirecTV cannot sue individuals for "mere possession" of technology that is capable of intercepting DirecTV's satellite signal. "We're glad to see the court apply common sense to this issue," said EFF Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "Merely possessing a device doesn't harm anyone and shouldn't give a company like DirecTV the right to drag you into court without proof that you're actually stealing something from them."



From the ruling itself. The ruling does not apply to other laws like the DMCA.




Because we find that the plain language of section 2520(a)
does not create a private right of action against a person who possesses a device in
violation of section 2512(1)(b), we affirm the district court and remand for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion.




GS2

[alex70olds]

Learn something new every day. I did not realize Albert was part of that decision. Interesting.

[sodusme]

I don't see it that way. End users went to court in Dave cases and won on interpretation of a law. Was that ruling by an ill informed Judge ?


I just don't think you have accepted that the law and the actions by defendants favor them in most cases. Its not some ill informed Judge that it happens nor was it when the end users won.


As far as now going after the end user its not new to go after end users. Go back and look at the Dave end user cases.


As far as going after forums again its nothing new. Sites have been taken down going back many years now.







From the ruling itself. The ruling does not apply to other laws like the DMCA.








GS2

Judges have the ultimate control on what they rule on by wielding their gavel. If the defendants have inadequate defense which I feel a LOT of these guys in these FTA cases including Kwak, TDG and TheBroken have had than that is why I say an "ill informed" judge makes a decision based on the plaintiffs case. He may not get a decent argument from the defendants side.

There are plenty of laws out there written with "grey" areas and D/N and Nagra have capitalized on those including everyone else that has sued for DMCA violations and copyright infringement. Lets face it not every law is written for a black and white decision. There will be grey areas and those areas are almost always decided in favor of the plaintiff---given they have enough money. Plus throw in the fact the defendant has inadequate defense and its a slam dunk case for the plaintiff.

I'll tell you a quick story about a decision that was made in a traffic court case with a magistrate and myself and a cop that pulled me over for "rolling a stop sign". Now I was up to about 10 points and this would have meant I would lose my license. So the cops write the ticket and I tell him I will see him court. He was following me now mind you. We were on a windy, curvy road. He had just exited the last curve, which was approximately a half mile behind me so he could still see my car. When we were in court I asked the cop "So you are saying that I attempted to stop but didn't complete the stop correct"? He said "Yes that is what I am attesting to". So I asked him "So if I attempted to stop and rolled through the stop sign than my tail lights obviously came on"? He said "Yes I would suppose so". So I asked him then "Well if my tail lights were on and you were behind me how is it that you could tell if my car was rolling forward or not given that you couldn't see it from the side"? So the magistrate leans back in his chair and says "So you are saying the officer was not in a location to see if your vehicle rolled through the stop sign or not"? I said "That is exactly what I'm saying". The magistrate says "Hmm interesting defense"....WHAM "I find in favor of the officer".

Now that was a "grey" area IMO and that officer was not in any situation to see my vehicle there is no way in hell he could say I was rolling forward but the magistrate found in his favor anyways. Court systems are set up to favor the plaintiff not the defendant. They always have been and they always will be. If I had an attorney (a decent one) I'm sure I could have won that but I wasn't allowed one therefore I lost.

[1boxman]

Dang it, I got sucked in to this thread.

LOL...Can always learn something .. just have to learn how to sift .

[alex70olds]

Based on arguments made by civil liberties group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and attorney Albert Zakarian for defendant Mike Treworgy, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that DirecTV cannot sue individuals for "mere possession" of technology that is capable of intercepting DirecTV's satellite signal. "We're glad to see the court apply common sense to this issue," said EFF Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "Merely possessing a device doesn't harm anyone and shouldn't give a company like DirecTV the right to drag you into court without proof that you're actually stealing something from them."




Judges have the ultimate control on what they rule on by wielding their gavel. If the defendants have inadequate defense which I feel a LOT of these guys in these FTA cases including Kwak, TDG and TheBroken have had than that is why I say an "ill informed" judge makes a decision based on the plaintiffs case. He may not get a decent argument from the defendants side.



Albert was Bob's defense council in D1sh's case against Him. He is thought to be one of the better lawyers in these type of cases.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Judges have the ultimate control on what they rule on by wielding their gavel. If the defendants have inadequate defense which I feel a LOT of these guys in these FTA cases including Kwak, TDG and TheBroken have had than that is why I say an "ill informed" judge makes a decision based on the plaintiffs case. He may not get a decent argument from the defendants side.

There are plenty of laws out there written with "grey" areas and D/N and Nagra have capitalized on those including everyone else that has sued for DMCA violations and copyright infringement. Lets face it not every law is written for a black and white decision. There will be grey areas and those areas are almost always decided in favor of the plaintiff---given they have enough money. Plus throw in the fact the defendant has inadequate defense and its a slam dunk case for the plaintiff.

I'll tell you a quick story about a decision that was made in a traffic court case with a magistrate and myself and a cop that pulled me over for "rolling a stop sign". Now I was up to about 10 points and this would have meant I would lose my license. So the cops write the ticket and I tell him I will see him court. He was following me now mind you. We were on a windy, curvy road. He had just exited the last curve, which was approximately a half mile behind me so he could still see my car. When we were in court I asked the cop "So you are saying that I attempted to stop but didn't complete the stop correct"? He said "Yes that is what I am attesting to". So I asked him "So if I attempted to stop and rolled through the stop sign than my tail lights obviously came on"? He said "Yes I would suppose so". So I asked him then "Well if my tail lights were on and you were behind me how is it that you could tell if my car was rolling forward or not given that you couldn't see it from the side"? So the magistrate leans back in his chair and says "So you are saying the officer was not in a location to see if your vehicle rolled through the stop sign or not"? I said "That is exactly what I'm saying". The magistrate says "Hmm interesting defense"....WHAM "I find in favor of the officer".

Now that was a "grey" area IMO and that officer was not in any situation to see my vehicle there is no way in hell he could say I was rolling forward but the magistrate found in his favor anyways. Court systems are set up to favor the plaintiff not the defendant. They always have been and they always will be. If I had an attorney (a decent one) I'm sure I could have won that but I wasn't allowed one therefore I lost.


Kwak and TDG had good defense lawyers. I think when one side looses its natural people will say that side was not represented well or the judge screwed up.


The law in Canada was certainly Grey. So much that they were conflicting decisions mostly in favor of defendants and their lawyers against the provider's lawyers. In fact the two highest rulings in Canada by the BC Court of Appeals and the Ontario Court of appeals had ruled in favor of the defendants.


However the Supreme Court of Canada than ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs being the provider. I was quite disappointed but should I say the judges were ill informed or the party that lost had poor representation ?



GS2

[sodusme]

Kwak and TDG had good defense lawyers. I think when one side looses its natural people will say that side was not represented well or the judge screwed up.


The law in Canada was certainly Grey. So much that they were conflicting decisions mostly in favor of defendants and their lawyers against the provider's lawyers. In fact the two highest rulings in Canada by the BC Court of Appeals and the Ontario Court of appeals had ruled in favor of the defendants.


However the Supreme Court of Canada than ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs being the provider. I was quite disappointed but should I say the judges were ill informed or the party that lost had poor representation ?



GS2

Just the fact that you had any branch of your judicial panel siding with defendants should tip you off that Canadian and U.S. judicial systems apparently vary greatly. You won't have that in the U.S. court system. There are no conflicting decisions and in fact the U.S. court system has a term they go by that slips my mind at the moment that basically means "we stand by the law even if its wrong". It basically means that if an earlier court has made a decision (even if its wrong) that any succeeding court is bound to adhere to the same decision even if the judge knows its wrong.

So you were "for" the pirates or in other words the defendants then? That tells me that you disagree with some aspect of the way these court cases are being litigated? True? Untrue? You have a lot of wisdom on these court cases and I enjoy the back and forth we have but your last statement of "disappointment" at the supreme courts ruling tells me that deep down you know these court cases are "slanted".

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

Just the fact that you had any branch of your judicial panel siding with defendants should tip you off that Canadian and U.S. judicial systems apparently vary greatly. You won't have that in the U.S. court system. There are no conflicting decisions and in fact the U.S. court system has a term they go by that slips my mind at the moment that basically means "we stand by the law even if its wrong". It basically means that if an earlier court has made a decision (even if its wrong) that any succeeding court is bound to adhere to the same decision even if the judge knows its wrong.

So you were "for" the pirates or in other words the defendants then? That tells me that you disagree with some aspect of the way these court cases are being litigated? True? Untrue? You have a lot of wisdom on these court cases and I enjoy the back and forth we have but your last statement of "disappointment" at the supreme courts ruling tells me that deep down you know these court cases are "slanted".


I don't see much of a difference in the court systems. There were conflicting decisions in the Dave end user cases in the US. However there was a real issue to be decided on what the proper interpretation of the law in Canada should be since there were two ways to interpret-ate it with not much case law on it.


I was a defendant myself in Canada with selling grey market subscriptions to Canadians to be hooked up with Dave or DN. I just believe in calling the way it is based on case law and believe in reality. Its not that I want it to be the way it is just that it makes more sense to me to state it the way it is.


I am for any defendants that can win against providers but just not into bsing about their chances. I do feel defendants are at a big disadvantage in affording legal counsel the way the providers can, its obvious there is a major difference but it does not mean I think defendants will win with money to burn if the evidence is against them.


I was quite disappointed with the Canadian Supreme Court ruling. It made my own case not winnable. There was not one dissenting Judge in that decision so they completely disagreed with the lower court ruling. The Canadian Government was an intervener in the case and some will say the Supreme Court was not going to rule against the Government. So what do you do ? say it was rigged or accept it. To me you have to accept it because it is what it is regardless if you think its wrong. So can't say to people well screw it that decision was wrong so ignore it when its the final ruling and won't change. The only way it could change would be if the Government changed the law. Not very likely.



GS2

[kutter]

Just the fact that you had any branch of your judicial panel siding with defendants should tip you off that Canadian and U.S. judicial systems apparently vary greatly. You won't have that in the U.S. court system. There are no conflicting decisions and in fact the U.S. court system has a term they go by that slips my mind at the moment that basically means "we stand by the law even if its wrong". It basically means that if an earlier court has made a decision (even if its wrong) that any succeeding court is bound to adhere to the same decision even if the judge knows its wrong.

So you were "for" the pirates or in other words the defendants then? That tells me that you disagree with some aspect of the way these court cases are being litigated? True? Untrue? You have a lot of wisdom on these court cases and I enjoy the back and forth we have but your last statement of "disappointment" at the supreme courts ruling tells me that deep down you know these court cases are "slanted".

The cases that GS2 is referring to were based on a narrow interpretation of the law. The Supreme Court judges disagreed with that interpretation.

In Canada it's against the law (Radio Communications Act) to subscribe to a service that isn't authorized to sell in Canada. In effect making criminals out of people that were actually paying to get US signals. It's been a controversial subject for many years. GS2's case was based on that premise. That we should have the right to subscribe to the US providers if we want to. It really wasn't about piracy.

[alex70olds]

The cases that GS2 is referring to were based on a narrow interpretation of the law. The Supreme Court judges disagreed with that interpretation.

In Canada it's against the law (Radio Communications Act) to subscribe to a service that isn't authorized to sell in Canada. In effect making criminals out of people that were actually paying to get US signals. It's been a controversial subject for many years. GS2's case was based on that premise. That we should have the right to subscribe to the US providers if we want to. It really wasn't about piracy.

If it is against the RCA, and the courts have ruled it illegal it is Piracy. Hahaha you Pirates! :D

|-|3y, $ t●p f○||○w¡ng G $2 @r○unD lol.

[kutter]

If it is against the RCA, and the courts have ruled it illegal it is Piracy. Hahaha you Pirates! :D

|-|3y, $ t●p f○||○w¡ng G $2 @r○unD lol.

LOL ... actually, I came here to see what Hanni was up to :)

then I felt the need to respond :noidea:

[kutter]

If it is against the RCA, and the courts have ruled it illegal it is Piracy. Hahaha you Pirates! :D

|-|3y, $ t●p f○||○w¡ng G $2 @r○unD lol.

at the time 2 lower courts had ruled that it wasn't against the RCA ... :)

[alex70olds]

LOL ... actually, I came here to see what Hanni was up to :)

then I felt the need to respond :noidea:

Lol now that is funny! I dont care who you are! ;)


at the time 2 lower courts had ruled that it wasn't against the RCA ... :)

Lol you dudes are Pirates. :lol::p:policeman:

[kutter]

Lol now that is funny! I dont care who you are! ;)



Lol you dudes are Pirates. :lol::p:policeman:

can't speak for anyone else, but I never claimed I wasn't :rotflmao:

[Condor]

Lol now that is funny! I dont care who you are! ;)



Lol you dudes are Pirates. :lol::p:policeman:

You mean used to be pirates...There are no more pirates..At least not "above ground" pirates.....Hehehehheee..http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd479/cbuffalo68/smileys/pirate-peche.gif (http://media.photobucket.com/user/cbuffalo68/media/smileys/pirate-peche.gif.html)

Now..She's a real pirate......Lol..........http://i493.photobucket.com/albums/rr298/bolivia_04/anon%20mex/554187_214513115392810_1545996535_n_zps7c8447e7.jp g (http://s493.photobucket.com/user/bolivia_04/media/anon%20mex/554187_214513115392810_1545996535_n_zps7c8447e7.jp g.html)

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

If it is against the RCA, and the courts have ruled it illegal it is Piracy. Hahaha you Pirates! :D

|-|3y, $ t●p f○||○w¡ng G $2 @r○unD lol.


Yes big ass Pirates Lol. But it is kinda funny being called a Pirate for paying to watch. Only in Canada Eh


Even the court had to throw this in with the ruling.



In any event, I do not think it correct to insinuate that the decision in this appeal will have the effect of automatically branding every Canadian resident who subscribes to and pays for U.S. DTH broadcasting services as a criminal.




GS2

[ImissDAVE]

I trust nobody. GS2 or Gunsmoke or whatever his name is....his posts read like he`s a Dishnet Cheerleader.
Hannibull spends too much time on this crap.
True testing is dead, the N3 hack exists but only the ppl who run the big P$ have it and it`s all just so depressing :(

[Hannibalector]

I trust nobody. GS2 or Gunsmoke or whatever his name is....his posts read like he`s a Dishnet Cheerleader.
Hannibull spends too much time on this crap.
True testing is dead, the N3 hack exists but only the ppl who run the big P$ have it and it`s all just so depressing :(

you sir are a genius !

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I trust nobody. GS2 or Gunsmoke or whatever his name is....his posts read like he`s a Dishnet Cheerleader.
Hannibull spends too much time on this crap.
True testing is dead, the N3 hack exists but only the ppl who run the big P$ have it and it`s all just so depressing :(


Don't confuse reality with anything else.


Yes the hack exists in the underground for certain rich people only. :crazy:



GS2

[missclinton]

Don't confuse reality with anything else.


Yes the hack exist in the underground for certain rich people only. :crazy:



GS2


only, its NOT an n3 hack :no:

[ImissDAVE]

What we need is a one of the P$ businessmen to have a falling out and release whatever "hack" it is to the public out of spite. That would be epic.

[dishuser]

What we need is a one of the P$ businessmen to have a falling out and release whatever "hack" it is to the public out of spite. That would be epic.

ya and kill iks...lol

[jazzman]

ya and kill iks...lol

Since this is the "Rumors" section maybe that's not such a bad idea. Considerate it, without iks there would be no fta except what's available out there for free. Don't you think then someone would release the nag3 hack? But then, who would pay for it. This opens a whole new can of worms lol. Just my mind wandering......but then nobody was ever sent letters about downloading files that were freely distributed as available...JMHO. I know that was back in the day the fta sellers were making a fortune and they are now gone but maybe it's about time for round 2.............wishful thinking LMFAO. Now you can all post your opinions and prove me wrong, you have my permission with any consequences.

[Hannibalector]

very much wishful thinking and you're presuming there's a full hack, as long as it's the end users getting it up the ass what does the seeders have to worry about, whack a mole

[ImissDAVE]

Who would pay for it???
When plastic died many of my friends were asking me what I was running. As soon as I explained the concept of key sharing they lost interest. All of them. Every single one.
Can u imagine if I described the current state of FTA and P$?
Plastic would sell like hotcakes my friend....don't doubt it for a second.

[iq180]

Since this is the "Rumors" section maybe that's not such a bad idea. Considerate it, without iks there would be no fta except what's available out there for free. Don't you think then someone would release the nag3 hack? But then, who would pay for it. This opens a whole new can of worms lol. Just my mind wandering......but then nobody was ever sent letters about downloading files that were freely distributed as available...JMHO. I know that was back in the day the fta sellers were making a fortune and they are now gone but maybe it's about time for round 2.............wishful thinking LMFAO. Now you can all post your opinions and prove me wrong, you have my permission with any consequences.
Who would pay for it, just think about,LOL, answer= CHINA =, just think of all the people that would buy a receiver with a N3 hack,
they couldn't make them fast enough,LOL,JMO.

[Hannibalector]

Who would pay for it, just think about,LOL, answer= CHINA =, just think of all the people that would buy a receiver with a N3 hack,
they couldn't make them fast enough,LOL,JMO.

that didn't work out so well with the Korean wave did it ....lol

[ImissDAVE]

Fred Raud ruined that. If he wouldn't have been such a bitch there'd have been FTA receivers with N3, and someone with the knowhow could have reversed engineered a box to get the plastic solution

[dishuser]

Fred Raud ruined that. If he wouldn't have been such a bitch there'd have been FTA receivers with N3, and someone with the knowhow could have reversed engineered a box to get the plastic solution

someone with know how would realize without a plastic hack there is no fta hack

[Recove52]

87 105 116 104 111 117 116 32 116 104 101 32 112 108 97 115 116 105 99 32 111 110 101 32 119 111 117 108 100 32 104 97 118 101 32 97 32 104 97 114 100 32 116 105 109 101 32 103 101 116 116 105 110 103 32 116 104 101 32 115 111 117 114 99 101 32 99 111 100 101 32 104 109 109 110

[ImissDAVE]

someone with know how would realize without a plastic hack there is no fta hack

I realize that but Kwak was not interested in plastic, was he? He wanted an FTA solution. Of course plastic is the prerequisite, but I doubt it would have surfaced until someone reverse-engineered kwaks potential STB.
As far as I know, nobody else was actively chasing a N3 solution with as much dedication and money behind it as Kwak was. You'd think, after Tarnovsky's remarks about the ease in which he cracked N3 at the Black Hat conference someone would have produced a solution long ago.

[fn59]

87 105 116 104 111 117 116 32 116 104 101 32 112 108 97 115 116 105 99 32 111 110 101 32 119 111 117 108 100 32 104 97 118 101 32 97 32 104 97 114 100 32 116 105 109 101 32 103 101 116 116 105 110 103 32 116 104 101 32 115 111 117 114 99 101 32 99 111 100 101 32 104 109 109 110

translation:
W i t h o u t t h e p l a s t i c o n e w o u l d h a v e a h a r d t i m e g e t t i n g t h e s o u r c e c o d e h m m n

[ImissDAVE]

translation:
W i t h o u t t h e p l a s t i c o n e w o u l d h a v e a h a r d t i m e g e t t i n g t h e s o u r c e c o d e h m m n
you dont get what im saying. read my above post

[Recove52]

I realize that but Kwak was not interested in plastic, was he? He wanted an FTA solution. Of course plastic is the prerequisite, but I doubt it would have surfaced until someone reverse-engineered kwaks potential STB.
As far as I know, nobody else was actively chasing a N3 solution with as much dedication and money behind it as Kwak was. You'd think, after Tarnovsky's remarks about the ease in which he cracked N3 at the Black Hat conference someone would have produced a solution long ago. LOL don,t think anyone was trying to reverse engineer Kwaks STB...however Kwak paid 20,000.00 for some magnified photos of the ie. Card..to the expectancy of helping a third party in his Engineering endeavor ..there also was a 250,000.00 bounty offered for the N3 fix at that time ...

[ImissDAVE]

LOL don,t think anyone was trying to reverse engineer Kwaks STB...however Kwak paid 20,000.00 for some magnified photos of the ie. Card..to the expectancy of helping a third party in his Engineering endeavor ..there also was a 250,000.00 bounty offered for the N3 fix at that time ...

Fred Raud claimed (as unreliable as the claim may be) that Kwak had some people working on the hack in Korea I believe? (If it wasn't Korea it was somewhere like that) and that he only acquired his services as an adviser, to look at the work in progress and determine if it was legit or if he was being taken for a ride. It was only when Kwak started pressing him for development that he decided to cooperate with the feds and Echostar lawyers or whatever. I realize that story is probably full of holes and very self-serving, but let's assume that it's at least partially true.
Tarnovsky's remark and Fred Raud's claim leads me to believe that Nagra did not implement that many changes in security between N2 and N3 and that the encryption could be circumvented with not that much more effort.
Looking at what some P$ had to offer a couple years ago as far as full PPV movie (not all-day tickets mind you but actual individual PPV movies) availability it's my theory that there MUST be a workable solution to N3, because I cannot see these server farm owners continuosly ordering movies over and over again. Even with a handful of main sub and tons of seeders it doesn't seem sustainable.
I'm not an expert or particularly tech savvy, but it's only logical to conclude the big successful P$ owners are using a hack or work around of some type. How this method has not leaked is a mystery to me, whoever the people responsible for the solution are keeping their lips tightly sealed and their circle very small.
It's a damned shame if you ask me.

[Marcella]

Pity, only in Amsterdam u say. lol

[NHL]

Who would pay for it, just think about,LOL, answer= CHINA =, just think of all the people that would buy a receiver with a N3 hack,
they couldn't make them fast enough,LOL,JMO.

I think most if not all would jump ship to that idea, but until all current fta units become door stoppers then you may not see that happening.as we all see at present times most if not all fta units can work in one way or an other with the iks method.

If a hack exists how would one get compinsated for releasing it only way would be I think new unit and only 1 unit cause once market is flooded with dif units then hacker/coder call em what you like that released open file would have not gained for the hard work.

Just like the early days of fta units not all coders got $$$$ for ther file bins, cause the manf of the unit did not have the coin to give upfront so they gave recievers instead and then we saw the sale pitchs on many dif forum sites, cause that was the only way for coders to get $$$ for ther work. No wonder we seen so many clones cause manufacture did not give **** all they did was munafacture and sell the units and offered some coders units to provide file for them, but after a while when they coders could not move ther stock to get compensated for ther work, it was not worth it for them to holding on to units that you could not sell, and that's why for some units took for ever to get a bin file posted when an ecm would happen.

So until all current fta toys become door stoppers there for sure wont be a bin file in open forums.