DN $3500 demand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishtrasher

wuf says you bought a code to access nfps, that declaration have the same value to the court as any other declaration.

they file as evidence of code use private messages and forum posts

forums posts by nfps admins list your code as stolen and cancelled

forum post vs forum post, forum post from a reseller vs forum post from nfps admins, is up to the court to decide

when the only evidence is wuf declaration and a forum post, you have some space to fight back in the same grounds

---

We do not know what evidence they may or may not have nor what they may or may not get. Providers have a habit of surprising you like when we found out they spoke to neighbors of defendants in some other past cases to get evidence against them. They may not have anything else but I would not rule that out. When and if someone decides to push the issue in court is when they will try to gather evidence against you. There is no reason to do that now. Rushing out to get rid of your satellite dish & receiver is one thing but you better make sure all your neighbors will lie and say you saw one on your roof.

Quote:

---

They can't prove you have a box, of course if you receive a letter take all boxes, cables, antennas, etc. out of your house.

---

GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishtrasher

wuf is no thief, he is a honorable gentleman that infiltrated nfps to take it down

wuf is a thief, profiting from iks code sales scam, once being caught by dn hands off information to save his a**

if a thief declaration is unacceptable, then dn has no evidence

all the lawsuit is based on wuf declaration, any good lawyer can destroy that in a minute

if that declaration is enough evidence, why is dn searching for evidence of actual code use?

---

Not sure what your saying but wulfman has business records of the purchases the defendants bought. Are you saying they are fake ? are you saying wulfman was not in that business. ?

What exactly is the good lawyer going to destroy. ? where did you come up with that DN is searching for the evidence of the actual code used ? Maybe they are and maybe they aren't but just wondering where you get that from.



GS2

I get what dishtrasher is saying here concerning the big picture. Also thank you for taking the time to read through these I just don't have the patience for that.

They are presenting a declaration from a known thief that being Wuf. We can call him a thief since that is obvious that he facilitated a business to steal DN programming. So if his "declaration" of what he sold you, how it worked, his involvement, your involvement and so forth is good enough from a known thief, then why wouldn't forum posts on a forum from others that are viewed as a "thief" declaring that NFPS is down namely pirate forum admins be viewed as just as good? In other words he's saying that any good attorney would tear that declaration apart as it was written by a thief trying to save his own *ss. One thief vs another thief.

Also I highly doubt they are getting ISP records. You have to remember there exists no set time for an ISP to keep records of a users activity online. Some ISP's only hold that information for 30 days. And yes I'm aware of the NSA's spying but they don't really have all your ISP records dating back to when Jesus was a baby. That's a falsehood. Not to mention the NSA is not going to be called in on something like this.

We only know the actual evidence filed in court, that's wuf and Rogers declaration.

wuf declaration: I sold via paypal a code to the defendant to access a iks server

Because there is no wrong doing sending money for wathever reason to wuf, including purchasing a iks server access code, they need Rogers declaration.

The lawsuit is about interception and circumventing dish signal. Buying a code is one step but not definitive proof of the actual interception and circumvention take place.

Rogers, private investigator hired by dn lawyers, so any private investigator can question his declaration, declared: that he read private messages and posts under a nickname in a forum, and in that messages and post some says: received codes, codes working, codes not working (yes, one of the messages used as proof of using a code is that the code don't work), etc.

where did you come up with that DN is searching for the evidence of the actual code used ? Maybe they are and maybe they aren't but just wondering where you get that from.

court documents

Because those two declarations aren't contested in court for entering a default judgement, the court take both as true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

We do not know what evidence they may or may not have nor what they may or may not get. Providers have a habit of surprising you like when we found out they spoke to neighbors of defendants in some other past cases to get evidence against them. They may not have anything else but I would not rule that out. When and if someone decides to push the issue in court is when they will try to gather evidence against you. There is no reason to do that now. Rushing out to get rid of your satellite dish & receiver is one thing but you better make sure all your neighbors will lie and say you saw one on your roof.
GS2

---

all that info (so-called evidence) is supposed to be disclosed during "Pretrial Discovery" ...ill save the typing and c/p for some of you that are so interested...read carefully twice if you have to...DN would be screwed if it were ME defending myself against these cockamamy demand letters ;)

hXXp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

What holes do you see in the demand letter. ? I think this whole issue of the demand letter is overblown because it really has nothing to do with any of the legal issues that would be argued in court. I don't see any defense based on the demand letter being this or that.


I also believe some have contacted professional lawyers for advice and maybe take it on. A real good lawyer will be honest with you about your chances and the costs to defend. He could say I'll take it on for you but I have to warn you about this and that, do you want to move forward. Other lawyers might be oh so happy to take this on you for as long as they see the green bucks.


So far I have seen that they have proof of the business records of your purchase of subscription plus I saw pics of some panels posted even know I don't fully understand that plus a support affidavit from Wulfman which all count towards possibly proving their claim. I do see that unfortunately as somewhat strong evidence. I don't a splattered snake serniro, maybe a close battle to irked out a possible win if your clean with no incriminating posts, not having owned a receiver but certainly no cake walk.

GS2

---

thats my point..the LEGAL issues are more towards CRIMINAL and the sad part about it all, is, IF it (this crock) were fought in CRIMINAL courts? the dots would have to be connected or it would be dismissed faster than it was filed - trust me on that...the so-called lower threshold in CIVIL is what DN is getting away with in their argument(s)...the letter of complaint goes in 2 directions all without connecting all the dots ...if i buy a code to circumvent their sig they have to PROVE all the steps necessary to have watched their decrypted signals..THEY CANT..so the arguments made in a civil court are that i bought the code THAT is ALL they have

i could have bough it (code/don) but i had NOT realized that the IRD and/or dongle i bought were DOA (cuz im DUMB that way like many fools who get taken in) so even when trying to load the code along with all other SW needed i came to realize i was SOL and NEVER did connect to NFPS servers meaning my don was a DUD..OH WAIT, they have my ISP records to prove THAT wrong, right?? pffft

like many have stated, connect the dots, ((other than what you have - the records i bought a freaking CODE)) confiscate my hardware produce the ISP records, confiscate the servers and show me all this evidence during "pre-trial disclosure" and THEN mayby THEN ill fork over some cash and EVEN then ID argue to the judge that the amount sought is OVER INFLATED...its all a crock ---they cant locate and seize those iks servers (they for so long have offered a reward for) so, this...laughable


btw - didnt wuf one time post Back in late '11 early '12 here at satfix he needed $$$ for a family member and sent out codes in liew of donations made for that sick family member?? ...i bought a code off his asss at beta in early '12 good luck nag i have dozens of nics on all FTA boards and use fake info for all my purchases not to mention my ISP changes my IP every 6 months LOL, idiots ... oh and, need i repeat CHERRY PICKING?? if they had alllll the goods on all buyers?? there would be thousands and thousands of these trumped up letters not only for connecting to NFPS either --- ill wager the house they wouldnt dare send one of these letters to an already subscriber of their service...lest we forget, many who are in this hobby are subbing to their crap already (at the same time) ---they stand losing much more than the pennies they would get outa of any judgement...this will go away, eventually, all the while some of these letters falling on some poor enduser THAT is the shame of it all...i wish i could defend those...i have noticed they are going after those who dont have english as a second language, gee i wonder why?? just an observation ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sodusme

I get what dishtrasher is saying here concerning the big picture. Also thank you for taking the time to read through these I just don't have the patience for that.

They are presenting a declaration from a known thief that being Wuf. We can call him a thief since that is obvious that he facilitated a business to steal DN programming. So if his "declaration" of what he sold you, how it worked, his involvement, your involvement and so forth is good enough from a known thief, then why wouldn't forum posts on a forum from others that are viewed as a "thief" declaring that NFPS is down namely pirate forum admins be viewed as just as good? In other words he's saying that any good attorney would tear that declaration apart as it was written by a thief trying to save his own *ss. One thief vs another thief.

Also I highly doubt they are getting ISP records. You have to remember there exists no set time for an ISP to keep records of a users activity online. Some ISP's only hold that information for 30 days. And yes I'm aware of the NSA's spying but they don't really have all your ISP records dating back to when Jesus was a baby. That's a falsehood. Not to mention the NSA is not going to be called in on something like this.

---

But what is there to tear apart ? his business records ? the type of business he ran ? the panels posted ? the PMs sent and received by him from others.


I see his declaration as damaging.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishtrasher

We only know the actual evidence filed in court, that's wuf and Rogers declaration.

wuf declaration: I sold via paypal a code to the defendant to access a iks server

Because there is no wrong doing sending money for wathever reason to wuf, including purchasing a iks server access code, they need Rogers declaration.

The lawsuit is about interception and circumventing dish signal. Buying a code is one step but not definitive proof of the actual interception and circumvention take place.

Rogers, private investigator hired by dn lawyers, so any private investigator can question his declaration, declared: that he read private messages and posts under a nickname in a forum, and in that messages and post some says: received codes, codes working, codes not working (yes, one of the messages used as proof of using a code is that the code don't work), etc.

where did you come up with that DN is searching for the evidence of the actual code used ? Maybe they are and maybe they aren't but just wondering where you get that from.

court documents

Because those two declarations aren't contested in court for entering a default judgement, the court take both as true

---

At this point the evidence or some of it has not been filled in court. That would happen with exhibits before trial if it goes there.


I think your missing the requirement for proof in a civil case. Its the lowest bar. What makes more sense.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNF

thats my point..the LEGAL issues are more towards CRIMINAL and the sad part about it all, is, IF it (this crock) were fought in CRIMINAL courts? the dots would have to be connected or it would be dismissed faster than it was filed - trust me on that...the so-called lower threshold in CIVIL is what DN is getting away with in their argument(s)...the letter of complaint goes in 2 directions all without connecting all the dots ...if i buy a code to circumvent their sig they have to PROVE all the steps necessary to have watched their decrypted signals..THEY CANT..so the arguments made in a civil court are that i bought the code THAT is ALL they have

i could have bough it (code/don) but i had NOT realized that the IRD and/or dongle i bought were DOA (cuz im DUMB that way like many fools who get taken in) so even when trying to load the code along with all other SW needed i came to realize i was SOL and NEVER did connect to NFPS servers meaning my don was a DUD..OH WAIT, they have my ISP records to prove THAT wrong, right?? pffft

like many have stated, connect the dots, ((other than what you have - the records i bought a freaking CODE)) confiscate my hardware produce the ISP records, confiscate the servers and show me all this evidence during "pre-trial disclosure" and THEN mayby THEN ill fork over some cash and EVEN then ID argue to the judge that the amount sought is OVER INFLATED...its all a crock ---they cant locate and seize those iks servers (they for so long have offered a reward for) so, this...laughable


btw - didnt wuf one time post Back in late '11 early '12 here at satfix he needed $$$ for a family member and sent out codes in liew of donations made for that sick family member?? ...i bought a code off his asss at beta in early '12 good luck nag i have dozens of nics on all FTA boards and use fake info for all my purchases not to mention my ISP changes my IP every 6 months LOL, idiots ... oh and, need i repeat CHERRY PICKING?? if they had alllll the goods on all buyers?? there would be thousands and thousands of these trumped up letters not only for connecting to NFPS either ;)

---

So you think they have to be in house house observing that your watching their decrypted signals ? Sorry but it just does not work that way in a civil action. The preponderance of the evidence will make that determination of what is more likely.




GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNF

all that info (so-called evidence) is supposed to be disclosed during "Pretrial Discovery" ...ill save the typing and c/p for some of you that are so interested...read carefully twice if you have to...DN would be screwed if it were ME defending myself against these cockamamy demand letters ;)

hXXp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuit

---

There hasn't been any discovery. That won't happen to much later. That is my point we don't know what evidence they may or may not have.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

There hasn't been any discovery. That won't happen to much later. That is my point we don't know what evidence they may or may not have.

GS2

---

discovery is part of the full procedure and the right of the defendant in any of theses complaints, filed...the defendant has 30 days to ask for THAT meeting where alllll has to be disclosed...i would wager you dont even have to be a practicing lawyer to see through this crock at THAT meeting ..heck i would have cause for a cross complaint with the flimsy evidence they would produce at this meeting...this is what they bank on, a peep doesnt challenge their claim

btw - it is curious is it not? you are offering all this input and all ---especially with all varied opinions?? and so, hope you dont take offense in my asking? what purpose is it you have here what with all the claims YOU are involved with? is it NOT time consuming to spend time on something you have no horse in and be better spent on YOUR claims?...again, curious, cuz you seem to leave out the important procedural rules ( as offered in my previous post) these cases have for both parties when offering input??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

So you think they have to be in house house observing that your watching their decrypted signals ? Sorry but it just does not work that way in a civil action. The preponderance of the evidence will make that determination of what is more likely.
GS2

---

well yah, if it were a "criminal" case...remember in that DA case? how they gathered their evidence? maybe you should study the way in which they were able to connect allll the dots in THAT/THOSE cases(s)...this case is just a backdoor way in without having all the evidence to secure a judgement, ESPECIALLY on end users without english, as a second language

here is the major point --- if dn/nag think, for one nano second, these tactics of going after end users, will kill IKS?? they are fooling themselves (and i highly doubt they think as much)...they DO realize some of us are smarter than some and this is just as was intended, scare tactic...they're good BUT not THAT good --- sorry nag/dn, you suck...as you continue to use these tactics peeps are becoming wiser on how to play this game...good luck though :)

Why don't you just use a bulls-eye for a sig....... Good Luck :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNF

here is the major point --- if dn/nag think, for one nano second, these tactics of going after end users, will kill IKS?? they are fooling themselves (and i highly doubt they think as much)...they DO realize some of us are smarter than some and this is just as was intended, scare tactic...they're good BUT not THAT good --- sorry nag/dn, you suck...as you continue to use these tactics peeps are becoming wiser on how to play this game...good luck though :)

---

Kind of a hi-jack here but I know it was mentioned somewhere in this thread and I was just curious. Has anyone paid the $59 to this "Gary Ruff" for his "Unauthorized Defense Lab" kit at his site "piratecardblues"? If so, did it contain any useful info and was it worth it? If someone can pay $59 to get the amount reduced or at least get the proper wording so DN can't come back on you after you paid then I would think it would save people a lot of grief and stress and would be worth it. Just throwing this out there...