Now I've already taken the liberty of reviewing it for the 100th time and I can save you the trouble. There is absolutely NO mention of using a receiver in that demand letter or a dongle. Now I know you will say its merely a "peace offering" and they don't have to mention it in the letter, but here's the deal they are demanding payment under the alleged use of a "code" and "
for your reference" as they say in the letter the only information they list is the NFPS passcode, DES key, email, and ID. Now then when they file the lawsuit they write up this big thing about how you used a receiver and how the receiver works and how you used a dongle and how the dongle works and all this other, for lack of a better word, b.s. Now my problem with this whole situation is where is the investigatory work pointing to the use of a receiver? Where is the evidence of use of a dongle?
This whole situation is like the cops busting someone for buying some pot (yes I realize this scenario is criminal and the codes are civil its merely an example). Then they bring charges against the individual for possession of drug paraphernalia also. When there is no way possible way to tell if you bought that pot for your own personal use or someone else or whatever other excuse you could come up with. It would be like the cops writing up charges stating "....purchased pot which allowed the individual to smoke it in a bong". "A bong consists of a cylindrical tube made of....". You get my point here I'm sure? Just as there would be no way to "prove" other then just guessing or hypothesising that a person who purchased pot smoked it in a bong, there would be no way of "proving" that an individual who purchased a NFPS code actually
used that code. The courts can call it a preponderance of the evidence all they want but its really a crock of sh*t IMO.