DN $3500 demand

[dishtrasher]

In all the forums with discussion threads about dn demand letters there are two sides.
One side: you receive the letter then you have no opportunity, they got you, they have the evidence, you are done
Other side: you receive the letter you can fight back and have an opportunity to defeat dn because the weak evidence

I'm on the other side. None of this cases have gone to trial. We only have seen the evidence presented to support default judgements.

In the DA cases one defendant got his case dismissed by dn, remember that they have DA payment records and server logs, but the defending lawyer found a hole in the claims in favor of his client. After that dn amended his lawsuit claims against others to cover that hole.

DA cases are different from wufs, because they have the evidence of accesing the server to obtain the control words. If you were in a DA enduser lawsuit you are done and with all that someone manages to get his case dismissed because of the technicalities of the law.

In the judges discussion to grant default judgements there is light on the way to go. You can't contend you send money with paypal, but they have to proof you received the code, that with that code you can actually use it to circumvent dn, that you actually used the code, access the server and watched tv. Until today that evidence is just a private investigator declaration that he read a private message or forum post that "you" under a nickname says so.

[dishtrasher]

Kind of a hi-jack here but I know it was mentioned somewhere in this thread and I was just curious. Has anyone paid the $59 to this "Gary Ruff" for his "Unauthorized Defense Lab" kit at his site "piratecardblues"? If so, did it contain any useful info and was it worth it? If someone can pay $59 to get the amount reduced or at least get the proper wording so DN can't come back on you after you paid then I would think it would save people a lot of grief and stress and would be worth it. Just throwing this out there...

The advice giving there is to pay and avoid litigation. The most likely advice you are going to receive from any lawyer.

[TNF]

The advice giving there is to pay and avoid litigation. The most likely advice you are going to receive from any lawyer.

thats b/c attorney fees cost more than these claims and most of these peeps are penny-less BUT what peeps dont get, is, civil cases do NOT require Legal representation to answer a claim - get the meeting set-up (pretrial) and sift through what they claim, heck any peep with a grade 10 education will be able to see right through the flimsiness of it all - the only time you need a lawyer is IF/when you appeal the "judgement"

remember, at THAT first meeting (disclosure) all parties can agree to different terms ..and MOST civil cases do and NEVER go to trial...it all depends on the evidence or lack thereof

play it cool and force their hand, the onus is on THEM to prove the code was used...it is NOT enough to say you bought a code and therefore you are liable..THATS the prob with all this...they dn/nag make one think simply buying a code/don is proof - thats what courts are for...judges cant rule on simply, suspecting you used it or the probability you will...cant belive this is still going on, quite frankly

[TNF]

Why don't you just use a bulls-eye for a sig....... Good Luck

the day i worry about what i post on these boards is the day i am 6ft under...do i look worried?

[sodusme]

But what is there to tear apart ? his business records ? the type of business he ran ? the panels posted ? the PMs sent and received by him from others.


I see his declaration as damaging.



GS2

In other words tear apart his declaration by fighting fire with fire. Like dishtrasher said "thief vs thief'. Kind of like the old video game "spy vs spy". They are both "guilty" in the eyes of the law (Wuf and anyone posting on a pirate forum). Its obvious that Wuf is guilty or he wouldn't be in the trouble that he is in currently. So why should his testimony carry anymore weight than as dishtrasher says a forum admin saying that the sever is down? You are free to send money to Wuf as you see fit. That is not up for debate here. What is up for debate is that the money you sent him went to fund a criminal enterprise that was involved in IKS.

[TNF]

In all the forums with discussion threads about dn demand letters there are two sides.
One side: you receive the letter then you have no opportunity, they got you, they have the evidence, you are done
Other side: you receive the letter you can fight back and have an opportunity to defeat dn because the weak evidence

I'm on the other side. None of this cases have gone to trial. We only have seen the evidence presented to support default judgements.

In the DA cases one defendant got his case dismissed by dn, remember that they have DA payment records and server logs, but the defending lawyer found a hole in the claims in favor of his client. After that dn amended his lawsuit claims against others to cover that hole.

DA cases are different from wufs, because they have the evidence of accesing the server to obtain the control words. If you were in a DA enduser lawsuit you are done and with all that someone manages to get his case dismissed because of the technicalities of the law.

In the judges discussion to grant default judgements there is light on the way to go. You can't contend you send money with paypal, but they have to proof you received the code, that with that code you can actually use it to circumvent dn, that you actually used the code, access the server and watched tv. Until today that evidence is just a private investigator declaration that he read a private message or forum post that "you" under a nickname says so.

correctamundo..they nag appeared on site and confiscated all hardware (server) and the paper trails is what led them to end users that connected to his server and the IRDs that were bought directly from HIS shop...that is a case that will always confuse many ...but, confiscating evidence is a MUST to prove an end user is connecting to an IKS server or other illegal servers...

this and paper trails, IP logs all part of connecting the dots BUT i would wager the house, in this case? ISP would frown on handing over logs from their customers UNLESS the supbeonas were LOADED with accusations of logging into illegal servers and THAT exercise is costly let alone time consuming BUT more importantly they would FIRST need the server in question to tie it all up in a neat and tidy folder...

writing up a complaint letter costs peanuts ESP when you have a legal secretary filling in the blanks for you...something tells me this whole matter (demand letters) will die when one day, someone will come on here and show and tell of exactly how flimsy their evidence is ...also, cant wait for the day a judge says to the plaintiff, "you cant prove that code was ever used" case dismissed, "without prejudice". just b/c you have a claim its NOT automatic you will win it like has been pointed out by previous poster

[TNF]

In other words tear apart his declaration by fighting fire with fire. Like dishtrasher said "thief vs thief'. Kind of like the old video game "spy vs spy". They are both "guilty" in the eyes of the law (Wuf and anyone posting on a pirate forum). Its obvious that Wuf is guilty or he wouldn't be in the trouble that he is in currently. So why should his testimony carry anymore weight than as dishtrasher says a forum admin saying that the sever is down? You are free to send money to Wuf as you see fit. That is not up for debate here. What is up for debate is that the money you sent him went to fund a criminal enterprise that was involved in IKS.

thats correct. BOTH guilty in the eyes of the CRIMINAL courts NOT in CIVIL...this whole thing dont belong in civil - what dn is claiming is a loss of revenue as a result of...and then they take this nonsense about codes being bought to muddy the waters all the while stating piracy is illegal an act that would otherwise be CRIMINAL...its a joke

[sodusme]

thats correct. BOTH guilty in the eyes of the CRIMINAL courts NOT in CIVIL...this whole thing dont belong in civil - what dn is claiming is a loss of revenue as a result of...and then they take this nonsense about codes being bought to muddy the waters all the while stating piracy is illegal an act that would otherwise be CRIMINAL...its a joke

I have said from day one this didn't smell right.

They haul you into court for buying "codes", then once there they switch gears and sue for "piracy" as if its a given. Its like they say "OK you are here for buying codes but now we are going to treat the case as if that is a byproduct of your piracy and you are actually here for piracy now". When in actuality (regardless of what circumstantial evidence they have) they cannot prove "use" of the code at all.

[sodusme]

Kind of a hi-jack here but I know it was mentioned somewhere in this thread and I was just curious. Has anyone paid the $59 to this "Gary Ruff" for his "Unauthorized Defense Lab" kit at his site "piratecardblues"? If so, did it contain any useful info and was it worth it? If someone can pay $59 to get the amount reduced or at least get the proper wording so DN can't come back on you after you paid then I would think it would save people a lot of grief and stress and would be worth it. Just throwing this out there...

I believe someone posted either here or on another board that it was an alleged scam (alleged since Gary could be reading this and I don't want to "liable" the man LOL). That they bought it and it basically said "Pay up".

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

discovery is part of the full procedure and the right of the defendant in any of theses complaints, filed...the defendant has 30 days to ask for THAT meeting where alllll has to be disclosed...i would wager you dont even have to be a practicing lawyer to see through this crock at THAT meeting ..heck i would have cause for a cross complaint with the flimsy evidence they would produce at this meeting...this is what they bank on, a peep doesnt challenge their claim

btw - it is curious is it not? you are offering all this input and all ---especially with all varied opinions?? and so, hope you dont take offense in my asking? what purpose is it you have here what with all the claims YOU are involved with? is it NOT time consuming to spend time on something you have no horse in and be better spent on YOUR claims?...again, curious, cuz you seem to leave out the important procedural rules ( as offered in my previous post) these cases have for both parties when offering input??

I do not see crock with the claims. They do have evidence. They don't go to court unless they feel they have the evidence to be successful. They have all the money and tools, sad but true. Discovery takes place before a trial starts. That includes depositions and being disposed. No case has reached that stage yet and is still down the road. Cases move slowly.


What procedural rules did I leave off ? I am just giving my opinion based on case law and what I have seen with sat cases going back to 1998. I believe in reality even if it seems negative. I have seen so many come with ideas how easy its going to be to win and that the cases are bogus yet what we see mostly is loses because and people just continue to be misinformed.



GS2

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

In other words tear apart his declaration by fighting fire with fire. Like dishtrasher said "thief vs thief'. Kind of like the old video game "spy vs spy". They are both "guilty" in the eyes of the law (Wuf and anyone posting on a pirate forum). Its obvious that Wuf is guilty or he wouldn't be in the trouble that he is in currently. So why should his testimony carry anymore weight than as dishtrasher says a forum admin saying that the sever is down? You are free to send money to Wuf as you see fit. That is not up for debate here. What is up for debate is that the money you sent him went to fund a criminal enterprise that was involved in IKS.

So the idea is to say he is a thief and therefore his declaration will be useless. Do you have any idea how many depositions there have been in cases before from sat thieves who co-operated. I haven't seen one case where some declaration by one these thieves was torn apart, not once. They pretty well all turned out to be damaging.


The thief who gives a depo is not a defendant. Of course he had legal heat so he decided to co-operate and he has his knowledge of his illegal business he ran and the customers who bought subscriptions. You may think this doesn't count but I see it as counting.



GS2

[sodusme]

So the idea is to say he is a thief and therefore his declaration will be useless. Do you have any idea how many depositions there have been in cases before from sat thieves who co-operated. I haven't seen one case where some declaration by one these thieves was torn apart, not once. They pretty well all turned out to be damaging.


The thief who gives a depo is not a defendant. Of course he had legal heat so he decided to co-operate and he has his knowledge of his illegal business he ran and the customers who bought subscriptions. You may think this doesn't count but I see it as counting.



GS2

I'm not necessarily saying his should be thrown out but as dishtrasher said why should Wuf's deposition carry anymore weight then any other deposition? It shouldn't and in all likelihood wouldn't. If a judge/jury are to believe what Wuf says then they should also believe what a forum admin has posted about NFPS being down/freezing/not working etc. Its a two way street.

A thief is a thief is a thief, it doesn't matter what side of the fence the deposition is coming from. A deposition should be seen as equally damning no matter if its coming from the plaintiff or defendant.

[dishtrasher]

I do not see crock with the claims. They do have evidence. They don't go to court unless they feel they have the evidence to be successful. They have all the money and tools, sad but true. Discovery takes place before a trial starts. That includes depositions and being disposed. No case has reached that stage yet and is still down the road. Cases move slowly.


What procedural rules did I leave off ? I am just giving my opinion based on case law and what I have seen with sat cases going back to 1998. I believe in reality even if it seems negative. I have seen so many come with ideas how easy its going to be to win and that the cases are bogus yet what we see mostly is loses because and people just continue to be misinformed.



GS2

Your opinion and conclusion are based on irrefutable facts.

When dn filed the DA cases, everybody knows they have strong evidence.

We think that in the wuf cases evidence is fragile

wuf don't own the servers, don't have access to the servers, don't even have access to a reseller panel because he sold stolen donations and donations with less than a year of service remaining

wuf declaration is: defendant contacted me; he send me money with paypay and here is the record; I send a code, server name, port number and des key; the code was acquired from ******** Casci, aka tinieblax.com nemesis.com, eltwenty.com

He can't answer any other question, including if the actual circumvention took place.

[dishuser]

Your opinion and conclusion are based on irrefutable facts.

When dn filed the DA cases, everybody knows they have strong evidence.

We think that in the wuf cases evidence is fragile

wuf don't own the servers, don't have access to the servers, don't even have access to a reseller panel because he sold stolen donations and donations with less than a year of service remaining

wuf declaration is: defendant contacted me; he send me money with paypay and here is the record; I send a code, server name, port number and des key; the code was acquired from ******** Casci, aka tinieblaxxhotmail.com, nemesisxlive.com, eltwenty.com

He can't answer any other question, including if the actual circumvention took place.

you really think he didn't have access...lol

[Gunsmoke2 - GS2]

I have said from day one this didn't smell right.

They haul you into court for buying "codes", then once there they switch gears and sue for "piracy" as if its a given. Its like they say "OK you are here for buying codes but now we are going to treat the case as if that is a byproduct of your piracy and you are actually here for piracy now". When in actuality (regardless of what circumstantial evidence they have) they cannot prove "use" of the code at all.

They are treating the case as accessing their signals unlawfully and without making payment to them. That is piracy and what do you think is the purpose of buying the codes ? Do you think a court could think it was for piracy when the learn about what the codes do and the purpose of them ?


I don't argue about their being actual evidence showing that you used the code I just think a court can saying its more likely than not. With previous cases with devices one could try to argue the device had another purpose but not with the codes.



GS2