DN $3500 demand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sodusme

I'm not necessarily saying his should be thrown out but as dishtrasher said why should Wuf's deposition carry anymore weight then any other deposition? It shouldn't and in all likelihood wouldn't. If a judge/jury are to believe what Wuf says then they should also believe what a forum admin has posted about NFPS being down/freezing/not working etc. Its a two way street.

A thief is a thief is a thief, it doesn't matter what side of the fence the deposition is coming from. A deposition should be seen as equally damning no matter if its coming from the plaintiff or defendant.

---

Is there a sworn out depo from an admin saying that. ?



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishtrasher

Your opinion and conclusion are based on irrefutable facts.

When dn filed the DA cases, everybody knows they have strong evidence.

We think that in the wuf cases evidence is fragile

wuf don't own the servers, don't have access to the servers, don't even have access to a reseller panel because he sold stolen donations and donations with less than a year of service remaining

wuf declaration is: defendant contacted me; he send me money with paypay and here is the record; I send a code, server name, port number and des key; the code was acquired from ******** Casci, aka tinieblax.com,nemesis.com, eltwenty.com

He can't answer any other question, including if the actual circumvention took place.

---

We differ on our thoughts as to the impact on what he testified to. You can always find something someone did not say but add his declaration along with the other evidence and I think a defendant has a bit of a hole to dig out of.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNF

thats correct. BOTH guilty in the eyes of the CRIMINAL courts NOT in CIVIL...this whole thing dont belong in civil - what dn is claiming is a loss of revenue as a result of...and then they take this nonsense about codes being bought to muddy the waters all the while stating piracy is illegal an act that would otherwise be CRIMINAL...its a joke

---

Not sure what your saying because these acts are both criminal and civil. The acts have criminal penalties and and allow for civil penalties in them.




GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

They are treating the case as accessing their signals unlawfully and without making payment to them. That is piracy and what do you think is the purpose of buying the codes ? Do you think a court could think it was for piracy when the learn about what the codes do and the purpose of them ?


I don't argue about their being actual evidence showing that you used the code I just think a court can saying its more likely than not. With previous cases with devices one could try to argue the device had another purpose but not with the codes.



GS2

---

Could be for many other reasons: You purchased the code for someone else. You thought you were helping Wuf with his mounting medical bills for himself or his wife whoever it was. You had actually thought about going into the code sale business yourself. You bought the code but then didn't realize how it fully worked and you didn't have all the necessary equipment needed.

Now of course all these scenarios are contingent upon you having NOT posted on the open forums. There would have to be no evidence existence of you saying "Codes work great", "Nice fight", or "Codes not working" so forth. Also each of these would be just as easily explained away just as easily as DN can explain that you DID use them. They have no more evidence supporting that you actually used the codes then you have evidence supporting that you didn't use them.

But see the time to have done this was with the first case. Now its engrained and its precedent. There is a term that means "stick by your decision even if its wrong" and it slips my mind right now. We just learned it in my POLI SCI class. Perhaps you know it GS2? Basically once a decision is rendered a judge is unlikely to retract the ruling based on this term. Even if the decision was wrong in the first place many, many other cases have been decided on this one case. Therefore the decision stands and what is done is amendments are made to slowly chip away at the law and reverse it effectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

Is there a sworn out depo from an admin saying that. ?



GS2

---

None that I'm aware of.

OK the term is starey decisis and is Latin for: "stick by your decision" even if its wrong.

This is all about point of sale transaction. If they can prove that you purchased a code, that's it. If you have an alibi to prove you didn't buy the code that's something different. Otherwise forget it. The vast majority of what is used in the forums by end users is not really their focal point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoName

This is all about point of sale transaction. If they can prove that you purchased a code, that's it. If you have an albi to prove you didn't buy the code that's something different. Otherwise forget it. The vast majority of what is used in the forums by end users is really their focal point.

---

OK but the whole reasoning is buying a code is not illegal in and of itself. Like another poster said that is only one part of the equation. To be guilty of "signal circumvention" they need to prove the code was used for theft. They cannot prove that with the evidence they have. I say this because I highly doubt they have any ISP records. They are getting you into court under the guise of you being guilty of "buying" a code, however there is no statute (not the DCMA one they are citing anyways) that allows for a charge like that. I know Alex said they were charging wrong doing under a different article of copyright law and I haven't reviewed that. In order for you to be guilty under the DMCA (1201)(1)(a) there has to have been "circumvention" taking place. At least under that statute of the DMCA they are suing under. Had they sued you under article (1201)(2)(a) of the DMCA then all bets are off as mere possession of a code is enough to find you guilty under that article.

Its kind of like the "burglary tools" charge. I'm sure everyone has a screwdriver and/or bolt cutters in their trunk or possibly both. Technically those are "burglary tools" but you would need more evidence to prove it. Now if you can add a sky mask or gloves in the trunk then OK now we have a possibility of burglary tools. These codes can be reasoned as the same type of thing. In and of themselves they are nothing. But if you start adding forum posts and PM's well then OK now we are getting somewhere. By themselves they are nothing just as a pair of bolt cutters would be nothing.

True, if you buy a code how can that be used as circumvention on its own, its can't. Lets say for giggles a old women buys a code, has no means to use it cause she lives in a nursing home. Could she be charged?.....NO WAY.

The problem is, that's not the cases they are going after even if they did exist. The big problem is the other evidence ( as sod mentioned) that starts putting nails in the coffins.

You add the possible p.m's and pp transactions along with sworn affidavits from wuff and it would be a tough row to hoe.

Once again, keep in mind this is civil not criminal and they don't need to prove anything, just 51%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishtrasher

Your opinion and conclusion are based on irrefutable facts.

When dn filed the DA cases, everybody knows they have strong evidence.

We think that in the wuf cases evidence is fragile

wuf don't own the servers, don't have access to the servers, don't even have access to a reseller panel because he sold stolen donations and donations with less than a year of service remaining

wuf declaration is: defendant contacted me; he send me money with paypay and here is the record; I send a code, server name, port number and des key; the code was acquired from ******** Casci, aka tinieblax.com nemesis.com, eltwenty.com

He can't answer any other question, including if the actual circumvention took place.

---

Sorry,had to get up off the floor from laughing.
You really thing wuf was not associated with the servers?. He was at several sites selling for a couple of years.
Long before they even had thousands of codes to sell or steal...lol

No case has made it to the discovery phase yet. We still don't know everything they have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alex70olds

No case has made it to the discovery phase yet. We still don't know everything they have.

---

Well if it took them more then 30 days to discover the wrong doing and start the investigation and fire off the resulting demand letter you can bet your @ss they won't have ISP records. At least pending what ISP some of the offenders are using. If you're on a Verizon line you can pretty much take your records to the grave with you since they have the longest retention guidelines in place.

sod, I respect you and completely agree with what you have been saying all along in this thread BUT the precedent that has been set here is that it's cheaper to pay the $3,500 than it would be to hire an attorney to fight this all the way to the end. I really wish someone with a crap load of money to spare and their own attorneys on retainer would fight this because I too believe Dish would be handed their a** on a silver platter. Of course if they had that much money I don't think they would be in this "hobby" they'd simply pay for the Dish everything pack and have all they need. Then again if dish thought there was a possibility of losing a case I'm sure they would just dismiss the charges with prejudice to keep it from setting a real precedent and putting an end to all this BS extortion. You can rant all you want but in the end this is the way I see it...JMHO.

Dish filed 5 more cases Friday in Federal Court attributed to wuff. That said, the total number of cases filled is miniscule compared to the reported 4,000 + codes he sold. As I said before, we still don't know everything they have. Here are 2 defendants that did go out and hire an attorney.

Attachment 19327
Attachment 19328

Now I will say this, apparently Ech0's lawyers then gave their respective attorneys a peak of what they had, and that resulted in the following.

Attachment 19329
Attachment 19330

Thanks alex, it sounds like we now have at least two parties willing to fight back and good for them. I don't know how Pacer works but in Davis' case maybe we can find out more of exactly what dish has up their sleeve. I realize it takes time in these proceedings but I was wondering if you can find out more in the future and please keep us informed. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jazzman

Thanks alex, it sounds like we now have at least two parties willing to fight back and good for them. I don't know how Pacer works but in Davis' case maybe we can find out more of exactly what dish has up their sleeve. I realize it takes time in these proceedings but I was wondering if you can find out more in the future and please keep us informed. Thanks.

---

If you look at the last 2 docs, that is where they agreed to settle for $10,000.00. The cases are now over. They made some disclosure of what they had to the defense, but that is not public. I would doubt the attorneys would disclose this either.