Letter now Court case

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1boxman

He was ?? Which one ?

---

The Nfusion Privare server known as NFPS. Now if you want to get technical maybe wufman was not running it I don't know, but it seems he was selling subscriptions to it according to what I have read. If he wasn't then there would be no case as they rely on his records they obtained.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

His reason not to is because he might not think or anticipate some possible email or Pm is going to fall into the Plaintiffs or there will be some possible court order to his ISP or PayPal or whoever to turn over records. He may not think or anticipate that the Plaintiff could go to one of his neighbors in hope of gathering information that we have just recently seen in a case so in his mind he could be possibly saying to himself why tell his lawyer I am not going to be caught.



I say this because it is so unlikely someone decided to buy a subscription to that service without being able to use it. I don't think in reality people do that.



GS2

---

Man, i realize you think you are being the sound of reason but.......

Lets let this thing start before you finish it...gezzz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surfinisfun

Man, i realize you think you are being the sound of reason but.......

Lets let this thing start before you finish it...gezzz

---

I don't understand your point. Everyone is commenting and giving their opinions because there is a discussion thread on it. We all know it won't be finished for quite sometime. It already started and this is no different than other past discussions on cases that had started.


You made a statement and said why would he have a reason not to disclose everything. I gave you my opinion on why.




GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

I don't understand your point. Everyone is commenting and giving their opinions because there is a discussion thread on it. We all know it won't be finished for quite sometime. It already started and this is no different than other past discussions on cases that had started.


You made a statement and said why would he have a reason not to disclose everything. I gave you my opinion on why.




GS2

---

Yes you did GS,

I guess some will look at it from the offensive side, others defensive.

Hopefully one wins.lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarvinGardens

That is correct. And looking at his attorney's profile:

hXXp://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Find_A_Lawyer&template=/Customsource/MemberDirectory/MemberDirectoryDetail.cfm&ContactID=151535

He lists his practice to business, taxation and property matters. Hardly someone you would want to be involved in a highly specialized copyright case.

It appears that he did some research on the issue and has turned up the DTV case.

In that case the court held that simply being in possession of two devices (ISO programmer and unlooper) that could be used to hack an access card was not enough proof. The court struggled with their ruling even saying it was tempting to find for DTV but since those two devices could be used for something other than hacking they had to find against DTV.

The court went on to say that if DTV had provided some proof that the defendant had satellite equipment that may have tipped the scales to them.

So this lawyer reads the DTV case and almost verbatim claims that DN has no actual proof that their signal was hacked.

The big difference between this case and the DTV case is that subscribing to an IKS service only has one purpose.

---

you sure like to speculate don't you, what breach of copyright does purchase have without proof of breach of copyright ?

btw toss credentials elswhere

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

No bin does not mean no go. This is not beyond a reasonable doubt. Its the preponderance of the evidence. Your concept that they have show bins in a civil case is wrong.



GS2

---

oh ? it's the only way to intercept the damned CW's which infact breaches as for mentioned here in this quote by you below

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

This what they say in the complaint.





The problem is we know from the past they send out their investigation goons and very often to come up with more factual evidence. Now that this defendant answered with a defense they will. So if he told the truth its a valid defense to try. Whether its successful will be up to the court. But if they find some un truth than it will be quite harmful to his creditibility and logs won't be necesarry. It might only be necessary or would have been necesaarry if the court says there is not enough proof that he did intercepted the signal with the court interpretating it as necesarry.




GS2

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

you sure like to speculate don't you, what breach of copyright does purchase have without proof of breach of copyright ?

btw toss credentials elswhere

---

how is it speculation?
what other reason would there be to subscribe to a service?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

how is it speculation?
what other reason would there be to subscribe to a service?

---

he thought he was subscribing to Time Life, you got a problem with that ?

GS2 heres a question for you which could determine the outcome of these sites, if it is required to prove breach by way of interception of the signal from bins dl'ed can sites be subpeoned for there DB with regards to evidence of DL's ?

because if so and Nagra shows a downloaded bin theres a lot of explaining to do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

he thought he was subscribing to Time Life, you got a problem with that ?

---

so he borrowed your brain that day?lol

Its to bad there were not more men like fifties around.

nuf said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

so he borrowed your brain that day?lol

---

if he did it would be miles above yours dishuser

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

if he did it would be miles above yours dishuser

---

you just proved your ignorance with that sentence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

you just proved your ignorance with that sentence

---

stop trying to pretend everyone knows you pretend, it's what makes you loveable to this site and this site only

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

stop trying to pretend everyone knows you pretend, it's what makes you loveable to this site and this site only

---

you need to get out more

And another thread lost in old boy/school girl crap.....

Back to topic please.

It might only be necessary or would have been necesaarry if the court says there is not enough proof that he did intercepted the signal with the court interpretating it as necesarry. quote GS2


IKs can only happen by means of a Nagra image, by means of connectivity from bins from fta's posted with dongle transmission or RQSC and a serial port with a valid rom image, purchases of codes to hook up proves nothing towards breach of copyright, once an image along with a bin is utilized can the claim be made of copyright infringement <---notice the word,

OK, this thread is serious so let's not turn it into a bash fest...back to topic please, thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

GS2 heres a question for you which could determine the outcome of these sites, if it is required to prove breach by way of interception of the signal from bins dl'ed can sites be subpeoned for there DB with regards to evidence of DL's ?

because if so and Nagra shows a downloaded bin theres a lot of explaining to do

---

bump..............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

purchases of codes to hook up proves nothing towards breach of copyright, once an image along with a bin is utilized can the claim be made of copyright infringement <---notice the word,

---

On the contrary. You will see declarations presented to the court from DN investigators who subscribed to the same IKS service. They will state under oath that the purchase and use of these access codes allowed them to view DN's programming without paying DN.

Then DN will present evidence to the court that the defendant purchased the same kind of subscription. That is more than enough circumstantial evidence for the court to find against the defendant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarvinGardens

On the contrary. You will see declarations presented to the court from DN investigators who subscribed to the same IKS service. They will state under oath that the purchase and use of these access codes allowed them to view DN's programming without paying DN.

Then DN will present evidence to the court that the defendant purchased the same kind of subscription. That is more than enough circumstantial evidence for the court to find against the defendant.

---

keep going the viewers havn't got enough from you Marvin, tell us more, how did the dish network subverts view programming unauthorized, do tell Marvin, I don't give a **** about circumstantial evidence, where did they get the bin to do so Marvin ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

keep going the viewers havn't got enough from you Marvin, tell us more, how did the dish network subverts view programming unauthorized, do tell Marvin, I don't give a **** about circumstantial evidence, where did they get the bin to do so Marvin ?

---

are you delusional?
how many public sites are out there?lol

remember Marvin these threads are read and used as evidence in trial procedings are you saying that dishnetwork downloded bins and used them for testimony as evidence ? that can only mean one thing Marvin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

are you delusional?
how many public sites are out there?lol

---

how many attached to Kailis ?

who's side are you on?

Marvin why did Kudelski supply a card that was already compromised in Europe ? visa vie IKS why is that ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

who's side are you on ?

---

Hey lector..Drift.....................

Marvin everyone needs to hear from you on many subjects you wish to discuss, tell us more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

Marvin why did Kudelski supply a card that was already compromised in Europe ? visa vie IKS why is that ?

---

why not email them?
since they are the only people who can answer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KIDWCKED

Hey lector..Drift.....................

---

when you and the staff can explain why it is that I invited someone here that has been through more crap then IKs will ever know and he gets denied access says to me KID you haven't got a clue what you are up against, puff that chest amigo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

The Nfusion Privare server known as NFPS. Now if you want to get technical maybe wufman was not running it I don't know, but it seems he was selling subscriptions to it according to what I have read. If he wasn't then there would be no case as they rely on his records they obtained.



GS2

---

So you are assuming ?
Being a salesman or selling is illegal ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

why not email them?
since they are the only people who can answer

---

stop trying to play smart because you play better then you appear

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

stop trying to play smart because you play better then you appear

---

you ask for seconds from that stick?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

you ask for seconds from that stick?

---

you lost the crowd with that one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

you lost the crowd with that one

---

that means you got seconds...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

you ask for seconds from that stick?

---

why is it that you can be a wealth of info for sat set up and turn the other cheak when you get nailed to the cross on morality and evidentury

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

why is it that you can be a wealth of info for sat set up and turn the other cheak when you get nailed to the cross on morality and evidentury

---

excuse me?
who is nailing me?

Okay, back on topic...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1boxman

So you are assuming ?
Being a salesman or selling is illegal ?

---

Not for legal products. But if you look at the TDG case he was a salesman for Viewsat ( illegal ) and was found liable in his Civil lawsuit. They will come after you alleging you assisted others to violate the statue. I am assuming wufman avoided legal action by handing over his business records. Was he sued. ?



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surfinisfun

Yes you did GS,

I guess some will look at it from the offensive side, others defensive.

Hopefully one wins.lol

---

I hope someone wins and if this defendant is not found to be not telling truth then the court will have to weight the evidence if its persuasive enough. If its not than the ruling can help others. I hope hes telling the truth because than it would make sense to support him even with donations if requested. I like that his defense is not that you have the wrong person strategy, its I did not have the ingredients to intercept, circumvent, so it could come down to a matter of law for a court to interpretate. I do think the purchasing of these codes is harmful more than purchasing an unlooper because its hard or almost impossible to come up with an alternative reason what you were going to do with these codes while its more possible with an unlooper to come up with something. I believe that alone is a difficult barrier to over come by itself. This is civil not criminal where you do need much more compelling evidence.




GS2