Letter now Court case

[surfinisfun]

I've attached a complaint and motion for default judgment from a DA case.

You will see that DN did not have to allege and prove ownership of satellite equipment to get their default judgment.

All that was needed was to prove subscription to an IKS service.

They also had server logs to back them up so lets not distort what they had or didn't.

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

the part in bold is the dumbest thing I've heard you say in along time and you're a pretty smart fella, of course it's required GS2 you can't circumvent without it there has to be a bin present with a Nagra image on it, it's needed ....lol

No its not required. Really you need to read the law. It doesn't matter how you circumvent the encryption. What your trying to say is I am innocent if they can't prove I had a bin. That is pretty dumb in my opinion. That really will not help any defendant.



GS2

[Hannibalector]

No its not required. Really you need to read the law. It doesn't matter how you circumvent the encryption. What your trying to say is I am innocent if they can't prove I had a bin. That is pretty dumb in my opinion. That really will not help any defendant.


GS2

it is so required, jeez, you can't circumvent without it, what part of that don't you understand ?

[MarvinGardens]

They also had server logs to back them up so lets not distort what they had or didn't.

DN did not have to even allege or present any server logs to get their judgment from the court.

[surfinisfun]

DN did not have to even allege or present any server logs to get their judgment from the court.

Gee,j...I wonder why.

[alex70olds]

Great discussion. I did think DN had a slam dunk, but do they? Still only 9 cases filed, the last Jan 30. I cant imagine everyone else has settled. I also find it kind of funny a user in this thread (jacksonj) registered and made 13 posts, all in this thread urging people to settle. I am sure his username initials are just a coincidence. lol :P

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

it is so required, jeez, you can't circumvent without it, what part of that don't you understand ?

If defendants are found guilty by preponderance of the evidence by puchasing codes do you think it was proved that the defendant had a bin or that they even tried.


So where is this requirement in law. I can not find it. Now you tell me what part of that you did not understand. This bin requirement according to you does not exist in law.



GS2

[Hannibalector]

I've attached a complaint and motion for default judgment from a DA case.

You will see that DN did not have to allege and prove ownership of satellite equipment to get their default judgment.

All that was needed was to prove subscription to an IKS service.

hmm just read this part in the case file:

To access the IKS server, the defendent used a pirate sattelite reciever loaded with piracy software, which is a software device designed to circumvent.

number 26 in Defendents wrongful conduct

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

hmm just read this part in the case file:

To access the IKS server, the defendent used a pirate sattelite reciever loaded with piracy software, which is a software device designed to circumvent

They alleged it. They did not prove the defendant owned a sat receiver. They did not have to for the default judgment. It went uncontested.




GS2

[surfinisfun]

Let me pose a question: If a Grandmother in Florida went on line and bought a code,now keep in mind she is in a retirement housing facility with no dish's allowed.

Are they going to come after her for this purchase?......is it still illegal?

[alex70olds]

They alleged it. They did not prove the defendant owned a sat receiver. They did not have to for the default judgment. It went uncontested.




GS2

Thanks, because I think everyone missed it was a default.

[Hannibalector]

GS2 read the case file, it's necessary, allthough in the case file theres no evidence of a download to any bins or files, it simply makes the assertion, thats right default thanks for pointing that out

[Hannibalector]

They alleged it. They did not prove the defendant owned a sat receiver. They did not have to for the default judgment. It went uncontested.



GS2

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

[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.

[Hannibalector]

just say you're right Hanni and we can get passed this little issue ....lol kidding