Letter now Court case

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

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

[surfinisfun]

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

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

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

[surfinisfun]

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

[Hannibalector]

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

[Hannibalector]

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

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

[dishuser]

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?

[Hannibalector]

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 ?

[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

[dishuser]

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

so he borrowed your brain that day?lol

[surfinisfun]

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

nuf said.

[Hannibalector]

so he borrowed your brain that day?lol

if he did it would be miles above yours dishuser

[dishuser]

if he did it would be miles above yours dishuser

you just proved your ignorance with that sentence

[Hannibalector]

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

[dishuser]

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