Letter now Court case

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibalector

do you think it's necessary to prove it in court ? if not why allege it ?

---

They have to explain to the court how this works so it will make sense. I do not think its necesarry to prove. It will be up to the defendant to prove why he/she purchased the codes from an illegal service.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarvinGardens

A court will not automatically grant a default judgment. If that were the situation everyone would be filing lawsuits in the hope that the defendant will not contest. Much better odds than playing the lottery.

The court still has to consider the evidence before it will grant the default. Motions for default judgment are regularly denied.

In the DA cases the court found that there was sufficient evidence before it (evidence that did not include ownership of sat equipment or server logs) to grant the judgment.

My point is that DN did not have to prove to the court that the defendant had the means to complete the copyright violation and that's why they will win with the current round of litigation.

Subscription to the IKS service is all the evidence they need.

---

I agree with most everything you posted except this. cite me one case were a default judgement was denied were proper service was made. Let me know the case and I will pull the PACER docs. I have been wrong before, always willing to learn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alex70olds

I agree with most everything you posted except this. cite me one case were a default judgement was denied were proper service was made. Let me know the case and I will pull the PACER docs. I have been wrong before, always willing to learn.

---

Like I said, if it were automatic it would be better than playing the lottery.

Do a google search. Here's one:

PHP Code:

---

http://www.arb.uscourts.gov/orders-rules-opinions/opinions/evans/Bryant.pdf 


---

Here's another one:

PHP Code:

---

http://www.semmes.com/publications/cases/default-judgment-case.asp 


---

And another:

PHP Code:

---

http://louisianarecord.com/news/234028-clerk-denies-plaintiffs-request-for-default-judgment-in-who-dat-case 


---

no live links please.......

ooppsss JA we both killed links at the same time..lol thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarvinGardens

Like I said, if it were automatic it would be better than playing the lottery.

Do a google search. Here's one:

PHP Code:

---

http://www.arb.uscourts.gov/orders-rules-opinions/opinions/evans/Bryant.pdf 


---

In this case, the plaintiff was filing for a default Judgement, before an entry of default. In fact you are correct that the ruling was against an entry of default, but the defendat did reply, only 5 days late. In the echo cases they usually dont even file for default until aprox 90 days after proof of service.Again, I did not say it was automatic after 30 days, only it is automatic if no response, and defendant is not an infant nor in military service


Here's another one:

PHP Code:

---

http://www.semmes.com/publications/cases/default-judgment-case.asp 


---

Again in this case, you are confusing motion for default vs motion for default judgement. Of course a judgement is not automatic, but defaulting on the case is. A motion for default judgement is always reviewed by the judge, and damages awarded by the judge.



And another:

PHP Code:

---

http://louisianarecord.com/news/234028-clerk-denies-plaintiffs-request-for-default-judgment-in-who-dat-case 


---

---

Again Motion for default is not and completely seperate from default judgement. In fact, the assessed damages in BPG's case were lowered to 25K by the judge in the default judgement stage. That said, once a default judgement was entered in the DA cases of 10K, Dish used it as precident, and it was as close to automatic as you can get.

In the first case you cited, it shows the difference between default, and default judgement.

Quote:

---

In addressing Plaintiffs’ Application and Motion, it is important to distinguish
between the entry of a “default” and the entry of a “default judgment.” Federal Rule of Civil
EOD
by L Schacherbauer
7/20/2010
1:10-ap-01068 Doc#: 14 Filed: 07/20/10 Entered: 07/20/10 16:26:14 Page 1 of 4
Procedure 55 concerning default applies to adversary proceedings. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7055.
“The entry of the default by the Clerk under Federal Rule 55(a) is a docket entry.” Editor’s
Comment, Bankruptcy Rule 7055. If a party fails to plead or otherwise defend against a
complaint and a default has been entered, the next step is the entry of a default judgment.
See Johnson v. Dayton Elec. Mfg. Co., 140 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1998) (citation and
internal quotes omitted) (“When a party has failed to plead or otherwise defend against a
pleading listed in [Federal Rule] 7(a), entry of default under [Federal Rule] 55(a) must
precede grant of a default judgment under [Federal Rule] 55(b).”)

---

Edit, lol I cited judgement. My bad, I meant default. Thanks, I should have known better, unfortunately, I am involved in civil cases. I was the one confused, not the first time, wont be the last lol.

I don't see anything displaying that DN has been challenged in court on their "allegation", demanding proof beyond the mere fact of a defendant purchasing codes. No evidence to support their usage, such as showing a log wherein they connected to the server, or proof of ownership of a dish and receiver.

A good defense lawyer might be able to beat them, given that their evidence is flimsy, but it would cost well more than the $3500 initial letter demand.

What they have managed to do, apparently, is develop a precedent for future cases, by virtue of simply alleging theft of their service, and using the fact of purchase of codes as their only evidence.

You have to wonder why they haven't started an onslaught of letter mailing then, since they seem to have their (legal) ducks in a row.

I pointed out kinda of the same thing..and if ..well we are sure they have evidence ..from a reseller ..and sure .have probed for more . Why they haven't said as much in letters .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fifties

I don't see anything displaying that DN has been challenged in court on their "allegation", demanding proof beyond the mere fact of a defendant purchasing codes. No evidence to support their usage, such as showing a log wherein they connected to the server, or proof of ownership of a dish and receiver.

A good defense lawyer might be able to beat them, given that their evidence is flimsy, but it would cost well more than the $3500 initial letter demand.

What they have managed to do, apparently, is develop a precedent for future cases, by virtue of simply alleging theft of their service, and using the fact of purchase of codes as their only evidence.

You have to wonder why they haven't started an onslaught of letter mailing then, since they seem to have their (legal) ducks in a row.

---

Plaintiffs simply don't show all their evidence in a complaint. It will come out with testimony, affidavits, papers, photos, emails, messages, etc later on . You can assume they have nothing else than the business records because that is all you saw in the complaint but that could or could not be a mistake. The fact they are filling lawsuits and they probably had meetings with lawyers I think there could be more. I never saw a complaint where the plaintiff stated the defendant own a satellite dish to prove ownership. It just would not happen in a complaint which really is a general summary of their complaint. It could or could not happen later on if the defendant was to say in their defense they never owned a sat dish system. The defendant can file a motion to dismiss a charge for lack of evidence and then plaintiffs answers with more. It can be a game like a chess match.


Not sure why everyone is saying there are no server logs. It seems to me this guy wufman co-operated. Does anyone know the extent of his co-operation.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarvinGardens

Like I said, if it were automatic it would be better than playing the lottery.

---

To further your point (And I did learn something) and also for some ammo of those with letters, please see attached.

Attachment 17604

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

good luck with that
wanna bet they have the emails and pm's with codes

---

OK, so you donated to the poor guy and he sent you stuff you never asked for and just deleted it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hondoharry

OK, so you donated to the poor guy and he sent you stuff you never asked for and just deleted it.

---

and I woke up to a mailbox full of weed with my name on it but it's not possession...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hondoharry

OK, so you donated to the poor guy and he sent you stuff you never asked for and just deleted it.

---

Sure you just tell that to the Judge I am sure they will let you off wow I have some land in Florida to sell you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burnsy

I have some land in Florida to sell you

---

How much for the land?....LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burnsy

Sure you just tell that to the Judge I am sure they will let you off wow I have some land in Florida to sell you

---

The hell with the judge. I want to tell it to a jury.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hondoharry

The hell with the judge. I want to tell it to a jury.

---

I am not sure if you can request a jury in these menial civil cases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

I am not sure if you can request a jury in these menial civil cases

---

ya good luck with that
put 12 people on a jury that pay $120/month for tv and see if they side with you for stealing...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

ya good luck with that
put 12 people on a jury that pay $120/month for tv and see if they side with you for stealing...lol

---

even worse is the fact they are missing out on the tv they pay big $ for to sit there and listen to all the lame excuses of why you bought a code but never used it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

I am not sure if you can request a jury in these menial civil cases

---

The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by jury in certain civil suits in Federal courts. I don't know which ones qualify. I would not think it would apply to these cases.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

Plaintiffs simply don't show all their evidence in a complaint. It will come out with testimony, affidavits, papers, photos, emails, messages, etc later on

---

It will actually come out in the discovery phase of the litigation. At that time, which is before the litigants go into the court room, all evidence on either side must be presented, so there are no surprises once the matter is argued before the bench (and possibly jurors). Don't they do it this way in Canada, as well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

Not sure why everyone is saying there are no server logs. It seems to me this guy wufman co-operated. Does anyone know the extent of his co-operation.

---

Having access to the mod panel at various sites would not give him information in regards to the server, so it's doubtful, unlike the DA cases where DN would have had access to server records, that his PC would have yielded log information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by jury in certain civil suits in Federal courts. I don't know which ones qualify. I would not think it would apply to these cases.

---

In fact we have a right to trial by a jury of our peers in any matter brought in either municipal or superior court. Small claims is the only venue that does not offer that accommodation.

An attorney would know if the particular case at hand might be better for the defendant, if a jury, rather than a judge, were to try it. He might make that decision once he found out who the judge would be.

Wonder how much the jury selection process would add to your legal fees.

As fifties or alex says, you're probably better off negotiating the $3500 and be done with it.

But if we were truly a community, we would all get together and support a defense for one case to set a precedent and have the others thrown out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fifties

It will actually come out in the discovery phase of the litigation. At that time, which is before the litigants go into the court room, all evidence on either side must be presented, so there are no surprises once the matter is argued before the bench (and possibly jurors). Don't they do it this way in Canada, as well?

---

I mentioned discovered before and being deposed on any deposition given where evidence can be obtained. This time just said it will come later. The point is you can't judge the evidence or call it skimpy based on a complaint. Its unknown what evidence exists.

Quote:

---

Having access to the mod panel at various sites would not give him information in regards to the server, so it's doubtful, unlike the DA cases where DN would have had access to server records, that his PC would have yielded log information.

---

We would not know what he had or had turned over at this point. If hes just a mod then why did he have business records of people who bought subscriptions to the server. Maybe his role is/was bigger than suspected.

Quote:

---

In fact we have a right to trial by a jury of our peers in any matter brought in either municipal or superior court. Small claims is the only venue that does not offer that accommodation.

---

I would not agree with that. It generally does not apply to state courts. It can apply to Federal Courts with cases under common law.




GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hondoharry

Wonder how much the jury selection process would add to your legal fees.

As fifties or alex says, you're probably better off negotiating the $3500 and be done with it.

But if we were truly a community, we would all get together and support a defense for one case to set a precedent and have the others thrown out.

---

That happen with the Dave end user lawsuits. There was even a site started where lawyers came and posted with the community. It was effective.




GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

Quote:

---

Having access to the mod panel at various sites would not give him information in regards to the server, so it's doubtful, unlike the DA cases where DN would have had access to server records, that his PC would have yielded log information.

---

We would not know what he had or had turned over at this point. If hes just a mod then why did he have business records of people who bought subscriptions to the server. Maybe his role is/was bigger than suspected.

---

He may have had detailed information on his customers, but unless he had access to the server (for what reason I couldn't imagine, before caving into DN), he would not have had any logging information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

Quote:

---

In fact we have a right to trial by a jury of our peers in any matter brought in either municipal or superior court. Small claims is the only venue that does not offer that accommodation.

---

I would not agree with that. It generally does not apply to state courts. It can apply to Federal Courts with cases under common law.

---

You may not agree with that, but I'm talking from experience. Some years back, I was temporarily impaneled on a municipal court jury to hear a case where a guy was suing his insurance company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hondoharry

Wonder how much the jury selection process would add to your legal fees.

As fifties or alex says, you're probably better off negotiating the $3500 and be done with it.

But if we were truly a community, we would all get together and support a defense for one case to set a precedent and have the others thrown out.

---

Did I say that? If I did, I am not so sure. Still doing research on the DA cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

That happen with the Dave end user lawsuits. There was even a site started where lawyers came and posted with the community. It was effective.

GS2

---

Yep, reminds me of the days when the self proclaimed 'testers' were accusing everybody else of being 'free TVers'. Those arguments seem to have faded away. Now all that's left are free TVers except for the few plastic guys getting sued big time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fifties

He may have had detailed information on his customers, but unless he had access to the server (for what reason I couldn't imagine, before caving into DN), he would not have had any logging information.


You may not agree with that, but I'm talking from experience. Some years back, I was temporarily impaneled on a municipal court jury to hear a case where a guy was suing his insurance company.

---

The think in question ...would be ..having a panel with who he was selling for and what info was given about them . The mod panels on the sites ..if he had excess to ip's ..which ip's are not a person but still would link to emails and the person . So would be or enough ..whether they can us it all ..?

The info on who bought a code ..would confirm the paper trail to the person ..and depends on what info was given buy the person .

There was speculation ..but I doubt it ...on the paypal account of wuf was taken and watched .

Now we need see a hack in on a severer.. reveling who is connect and ip's ..now if they have any of this ..back to holding evidence to be presented at trial or before ..

Some or all of it ...can it be good ...or did they obtain it wrongfully ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hondoharry

Yep, reminds me of the days when the self proclaimed 'testers' were accusing everybody else of being 'free TVers'. Those arguments seem to have faded away. Now all that's left are free TVers except for the few plastic guys getting sued big time.

---

lmao, no, the real testers do nothing in public anymore due to the heat the free tvers brought. The arguments have only faded because of what you see right here in this thread. Hell I wont even tell somebody to where to look for a file. It is the price of posting in public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fifties

He may have had detailed information on his customers, but unless he had access to the server (for what reason I couldn't imagine, before caving into DN),

---

What if the reason was to access information on other mods/reseelers & their customers ?......... as kijiji has mentioned in Rockets Discussions "is it safe to donate" thread post # 12.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1boxman

The think in question ...would be ..having a panel with who he was selling for and what info was given about them . The mod panels on the sites ..if he had excess to ip's ..which ip's are not a person but still would link to emails and the person . So would be or enough ..whether they can us it all ..?

The info on who bought a code ..would confirm the paper trail to the person ..and depends on what info was given buy the person .

There was speculation ..but I doubt it ...on the paypal account of wuf was taken and watched .

Now we need see a hack in on a severer.. reveling who is connect and ip's ..now if they have any of this ..back to holding evidence to be presented at trial or before ..

Some or all of it ...can it be good ...or did they obtain it wrongfully ?

---

Or they can subponea the ISP. I found one DA case so far where the defendant at least started to fight the charges. Here in this motion for summary judgment. Exhibit 2 is the response of Verizon.

Attachment 17609

Hope he had a body condom on ..

Just as a refresher, Copy of Dixons Demonic Letter,

Attachment 17610

Attachment 17611

LMFAO They reference the Blacklist case. WTF has that got to do with an IKS enduser :noidea:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fifties

He may have had detailed information on his customers, but unless he had access to the server (for what reason I couldn't imagine, before caving into DN), he would not have had any logging information.

---

Basically no one knows what he had or what he cooperated with. Its speculation.

Quote:

---

You may not agree with that, but I'm talking from experience. Some years back, I was temporarily impaneled on a municipal court jury to hear a case where a guy was suing his insurance company.

---

That case might have qualified for jury trial. Some cases do and some don't.



GS2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

That case might have qualified for jury trial. Some cases do and some don't.


GS2

---

Most states allow trial by jury in civil cases, with no qualifications.
Here's a reference to California law, as an example; the first paragraph establishes that;

Code:

---

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=ccp&group=00001-01000&file=631-636

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fifties

Most states allow trial by jury in civil cases, with no qualifications.
Here's a reference to California law, as an example; the first paragraph establishes that;

Code:

---

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=ccp&group=00001-01000&file=631-636

---

---

From the California state court website.

Quote:

---

First, you do not always have the right to a jury trial in all civil cases. But if you do have the option, there are a lot of things to think about when you decide what kind of trial to ask for.

Some types of disputes cannot be decided by a jury. These include claims for injunctive relief or declaratory relief, or questions of law instead of questions of fact

---

You have to read case law to see what courts define as a right to jury trial under the constitution in California.

Quote:

---

Article I, section 16 of the California Constitution provides, in relevant part: “Trial by jury is an inviolate right and shall be secured to all.” This inviolate right preserves the right that Americans had under the old common law to a jury trial in certain types of cases. (People v. One 1941 Chevrolet Coupe (1951) 37 Cal. 2d 283, 286; Farrell v. City of Ontario (2d App. Dist. 1919) 39 Cal.App. 351, 356.) Constitutional guarantees of jury trials are not “inapplicable to all causes of action that were unrecognized at common law in 1791. The historical test we apply is flexible and may require a jury in a new cause of action, not in existence in 1791, if it involves rights and remedies of the sort traditionally enforced in an action at law or if its nearest historical analogue is an action at common law.” (Goar v. Compania Peruana de Vapores (5th Cir. 1982) 688 F.2d 417, 427 (citations omitted).)

---

GS2

Hijack start...
Geez, I think I'm going to write the bar by the time this ever dies with all the info I'm learning.:thumbsup:
Sorry back to regular programming.
Hijack end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke2 - GS2

Some types of disputes cannot be decided by a jury. These include claims for injunctive relief or declaratory relief, or questions of law instead of questions of fact

---

Those types of suits require legal knowledge to adjudicate, so of course they would not be able to be determined by a jury of ones "peers".

OTOH, a suit for $ can almost always be heard by a jury.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dishuser

ya good luck with that
put 12 people on a jury that pay $120/month for tv and see if they side with you for stealing...lol

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

even worse is the fact they are missing out on the tv they pay big $ for to sit there and listen to all the lame excuses of why you bought a code but never used it :)

---

great points for attorneys to nulify them during jury approval procedure ..........LOL

I still think you would have a better chance with a jury than a judge. However, considering that your defense lawyer(s) charge by the hour, the jury selection process alone will probably run you more than $3500.

ok call me stuppid,,nothing new there ;)

considering Wuf's codes were almost alll stolen,,, (bought mine
at beta almost yr ago and is on list of stolen even though some worked for a while at least until
nfps caught on) could'nt one argue as a defense
you bought the codes BUT they never connected to any server cuz they
were compromised??? i mean far as i know,,,the plaintif hasnt stated they have
server loggs so how would they be able to rebutt "that" ,,,

now we're back with ONLY buying a code so, is THAT enough??
to prove their claim?? maybe these defendants should check thir codes
to see if they are on this list?? food for thought

edit:for those who try defending him/herself?

suggest you try your code on the checker and if it says stolen
and deactivated??? take your webcam or digital and snap a still
photo and save,,,cuz i think it will only be avail for next 10 days