So many things in Civil court are like this. I never said it was right.Originally Posted by sodusme
Visiting Dignitary
So many things in Civil court are like this. I never said it was right.
Member
I guess you have more money to fight this than i do..Maybe i could find a lawyer to take this on but at what price and if we lose well i am out more money...turn your self in and prove me wrong that this can be beaten..or better yet give me the money for a lawyer you know that can beat this ..sounds like a great deal to me seeing you have this all figured out!!!!
Junior Member
i got certified mail from: dish network L.L.C et al. the illegal signal theft devieces and priate iks servers accessible via the internet. pay the sum of $3.500 to dish network for your past wrongful counduct..so ..i have to call to make payment ...any one becarefull..this from last year code . i was purchase..from ..wolfman...!
Visiting Dignitary
No I never said I had the money....
I think that is the real issue and frankly its none of my business but if you can't afford an attorney than don't post that they are turning you down and won't take the case. That simply misleads people. If its a money issue than be honest and say "Hey I didn't have the money for an attorney". When I said "I could get an attorney to fight this" that meant that I could find one 'willing' to litigate this....not necessarily that I could afford one. And like I said if you I couldn't afford one I'd go down fighting and they'd see my @ss sitting in that court room across from them and I'd bumble, stumble and trip through the court proceedings. After all if you can't afford an attorney what the hell do you have to lose?
Junior Member
same here, I just received a certified mail too.
Visiting Dignitary
Then you risk losing more, even doing a little time for contempt. Sorry bro, this is not a fair and equitable system.
Visiting Dignitary
Nah you can represent yourself without contempt charges. When I said bumble, stumble, and trip through that meant that obviously I wouldn't be familiar with the court proceedings like an attorney would. But that is not cause for contempt charges to be levied just because you represent yourself.Then you risk losing more, even doing a little time for contempt. Sorry bro, this is not a fair and equitable system.
You might get some lawyer fees tacked on but again if you can't afford a lawyer and you can't afford to pay the initial demand letter....than what do you have to lose? So you'll be working a few more years to pay off the judgement....its better than doing nothing.
Visiting Dignitary
lol kk, I took it as you might try what Nguyen did. He even had press. But in the end, he paid big time. As an enduser Elvis Perry tried the represent yourself, but he backed himself in a corner and the court awarded D1CK 10K plus 2,118.24 in costs, plus 11,471.00 in attornees fees. I am just glad I never participated in this IKS crap, it ruined the hobby anyway. My.02
retired Super Moderator
i got certified mail from: dish network L.L.C et al. the illegal signal theft devieces and priate iks servers accessible via the internet. pay the sum of $3.500 to dish network for your past wrongful counduct..so ..i have to call to make payment ...any one becarefull..this from last year code . i was purchase..from ..wolfman...!Just moved these here ..(thanks alex).
Looks like the letters are still going out.
Member
where did i say i couldn't afford a lawyer ??? I can afford a lawyer with no problem and the ones i talked to don't come cheap..they are lawyers of friends that have used them for other civil court problems and have an outstanding record. My job i can not have any type of judgements against me so i will pay the 3g.unlike you who seems to have alot of talk for someone that don't have a letter
Member
Like I said before folks everyone's situation is different. No point in getting in a brew ha ha over this conversation. I'm like norm and don't want anything against me as it would not look good on the job front. But Sod you say a lot of what you would do and that may sway some other person to do it based on what you say and have no facts to prove your case. I asked before if you know a lawyer that you can ask and have him verify all of what you say. You seem to ignore this request. You can get a copy of the letter and ask the lawyer most have no 1st call fees. Let's back up what you preach. No hard feelings just would like to see some facts. Like I said I payed mine just want to see if anyone actually wins??
Member
This is a c/p from another source. Last paragraph is the meat of the subject in my opinion.
Is this comparable to the dn extortion letters?
C/P
EHG
found this in one of the sections of dslreports and thought it might be germane to the recent discussions about DN's letters
SEEMS THAT PROFITING BY USING SCARE TACTICS IS NOT LIMITED TO DN AND THEIR TEXAS LAWFIRM, IN THIS CASE THE ISP'S DECIDED TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST THOSE WHO ARE EXTORTING AND BULLYING THEIR CUSTOMERS.
HOWEVER IN THIS CASE IT SEEMS SINCE IT IS ABOUT PORN THEY ARE WILLING TO ATTEMPT TO STOP THESE COPYRIGHT TROLLS I WONDER HOW THEY WILL VIEW dn IS THAT NOT WHAT DN IS ATTEMPTING TO DO EXTORT MONEY BY BULLYING THOSE THAT THEY "THINK" COULD HAVE RECEIVED THEIR CONTENT WITHOUT A SUB? SUEING A COPYRIGHT TROL IS ONE THING BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT PART OF THE "BIG BOYS CLUB" WHILE DN CERTAINLY IS - seems like if they were to give up info to dn while sueing this other company are taking opposite viewpoints on the same situation.
================================================== =====
Porn Copyright Troll Sues AT&T, Comcast Claims ISPs are Responsible for Hacked Porn Passwords by Karl Bode Monday 13-Aug-2012
AT&T and Comcast are being sued for "profiting off of porn piracy." Earlier this year noted that Comcast had joined Verizon in fighting back against copyright trolls they claim are extorting and bullying their customers -- provided said trolls are focused on areas of media neither company cares much about (like porn and e-books). Most of these copyright trolls fire off pre-settlement letters and file suit against anonymous file traders en masse -- in the hopes of scaring users into paying cash without a trial.
Last week Lightspeed Media and their representatives at Prenda Law sued both AT&T and Comcast for fighting against their mass-user subpoena efforts. Lightspeed Media has been shaking down BitTorrent users, but has also been trying to use the traditional copyright-troll tactic of suing a slew of users for sharing passwords to one of their hacked websites. According to Prenda law, both AT&T and Comcast are engaged in "negligence, computer fraud and abuse" and "civil conspiracy" for not handing over the names of these users. Says the firm:
"The ISPs chose to interpose themselves in this litigation, interfere with the Court's Orders, evade subpoenas, and prevent and obstruct Plaintiff from learning the identity of those ISP subscribers hacking into and stealing from its website," Lightspeed writes. AT&T and Comcast has also failed to take "any actions to prevent their subscribers from committing criminal and tortious acts against Plaintiff even after being on actual notice of the criminal and tortious activity."
Lightspeed says that the ISP defendants were "unjustly enriched because, while engaging in a dilatory legal strategy designed solely to prevent Plaintiff from learning the identities of their subscribers, they continued to collect subscriber fees from subscribers who did, and continued to, hack into and steal from Plaintiff's website."
Things Falling Apart For Porn Copyright Troll Prenda
Judge Starts to Notice Strange Odor Emanating From Firm
by Karl Bode Wednesday 13-Mar-2013
Porn copyright troll Prenda Law has apparently run afoul of one very tough Judge. We've previously noted how Prenda has been trying to scare broadband users into settling with the company en masse after they've been tracked downloading copyrighted porn films. Like other copyright trolling efforts of this kind, Prenda relies on often unreliable IP address evidence as hard proof, and the goal is to simply generate profits by scaring users into settling.
Prenda however takes things to an entirely other level when it comes to legal system abuse -- enough that this week the firm faced inquiry by United States District Judge Otis Wright in Los Angeles. Popehat has a fairly fantastic break down of specifically why this occurred, citing allegations of everything from shell companies to identity theft. Fast forward to this week, when most Prenda reps couldn't be bothered to attend the inquiry. Popehat's Ken White notes that the hearing proceeded anyway, with U.S. District Court Judge Otis Wright not taking any guff from the porn copyright troll: Judge Wright took the bench, grim and stentorian and bow-tied, and immediately commenced to take absolutely no **** from anybody. "I spent the whole weekend reading a deposition," he said, referring to the astounding deposition of Prenda principal Paul Hansmeier. "It is perhaps the most informative thing I have read in this affair so far." There was a collective intake of breath from the onlookers, who guessed that was not a good thing for Prenda Law. They were right. "There was so much obstruction in this deposition that it's obvious that someone has an awful lot to hide," Judge Wright commented later.
CONTINUE
I think that they know that but they are more then willing to file the lawsuits as they have shown in the past - The problem is until these lawsuits are answered by competent legal representatives who have expertise in this area of the law - dn WILL continue to get judgements against the very few who actually answer the lawsuit and fight it WITH A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS AND BE VERY INTERESTING TO FIND THE CAUSE FOR THE DISMISALS IN THOSE CASES
THE BIG PROBLEM IS DN KNOWS THAT MOST OF THE RECEIPIENTS OF THESE LETTERS CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE ADEQUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND FIGHT THE LAWSUIT SO THEY WIN BY DEFAULT.
EVEN IF THE ISP'S DO NOT PROVIDE LOGGING INFO MOST CANNOT HIRE AN ATTORNEY AND FIGHT THE CASE ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE COULD BE SOME DISTANCE BETWEEN WHERE THEY LIVE AND THE COURT WHERE THE CASE WILL BE HEARD.
HOWEVER IF DN GOES FOR THIS LOGGING INFO AND THE ISP'S OR AN ISP RESISTS AND GOES TO COURT A PRECEDENT COULD BE SET AND THE PROBLEM COULD GO AWAY IF THE ISP RESISTS THE EFFORT TO "EXTORT AND BULLY" THEIR CUSTOMERS IS SUCCESSFUL.
THEY HAVE IN THE CASE I C/P ABOVE BUT AS I SAID DN IS PART OF THE "CLUB" AND THE COMPANY INVOLVED ABOVE IS NOT - HOWEVER THE BIG BOYS ARE CONSTANTLY SUEING EACH OTHER OVER A VARIETY OF MATTERS SO ACTION ON THE PART OF THE IP'S IS NOT ALTOGETHER IMPOSSIBLE IF DN DOES GO AFTER THEIR CUSTOMERS HISTORY.
I FOUND THE ABOVE WHILE ATTEMPTING TO SEE WHAT INFO I COULD OBTAIN ON IP LOGGING AND WHETHER IT IS UNIVERSAL WITH THE IP'S OR NOT AND ANY OTHER INFO ON THAT - I THINK IT IS THE KEY TO THE CASE AND WITHOUT PROOF OF CONNECTION TO THE SERVERS I DON'T BELIEVE THEY HAVE A CASE!
BUT AS I SAID ABOVE EVEN IF THEY DON'T THEY WILL FILE UNTIL THEY ARE BEATEN DOWN IN COURT AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BY AN AMBULANCE CHASER.
Visiting Dignitary
What case did D1sh filed that is dependent almost solely on an IP? Most of these demand cases on based on different evidence. It seems that EHG is reaching as always. Apples and oranges. Add IP's to the other information, like what was in your demand letter, case over.
Visiting Dignitary
OK Mr. Rockefeller then get an attorney.
I was in sales for some 15+ years and have gotten pretty good at decyphering what people are REALLY saying and reading in between the lines. Your first post said: "I can't find an attorney to take this one they were all honest with me and don't wanna touch it" my ad-lib but for the most part accurate. Than you post back and say: "Well you must have more money than me I can probably find an attorney to take this but at what price". Again my ad-lib but pretty close to what you were saying. Two very different and contradictory statements. First you're saying "I can't get an attorney" and then you are saying "Well I can get one but at what price". So the main objective here Mr. Rockefeller is COST. Like I said I wasn't in sales for so long without being able to pick up on what people are really saying and their main objective or stumbling block. Yours my good sir....is COST. Which is fine I could really give a rats behind if you can or cannot afford an attorney but you are giving conflicting information here. Either there ARE attorneys that will take this but you don't wanna shell out the money for it OR there are not.
Which is it?
Now I'll remind you to try and remain civil here as you are bordering on p!ssing me off. And before you accuse me of being an 'internet bully' and a 'keyboard cowboy' and any other nonsense I have been nice with my posting to you up until this point and it is YOU that has started taking jabs. But I'm slowly losing my patience with your snide remarks however.
Why would I contact an attorney when this is the exact reason why I'm smart enough to avoid IKS. I have no dog in the race.
I'll get you a copy of a Michigan telephone book and you can call some. I'm sure there are plenty that will take your case. There is no real way for me to 'prove' what I would or wouldn't do under fire. But a lot of you know me and you know that I generally back up the smack I talk.
Member
B/C you are not an attorney. So really not qualified to say what you are saying, that's all. You don't have to have a dog in the race to get information, especially if it would back up what you are saying. That's all, don't see the problem with it. Come on laugh a little.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote