Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
powerforward
Well-known member
does anybody know anything about letters people are recieving from directtv for supposedly having a hacked dss card?
direct tv
- Thread starter powerforward
- Start date
powerforward
Well-known member
they are talking about taking legal action unless you
a)surrender all illegal cards and devices
b)write a note saying you will never steal dss service again????
c)repaying for all service stolen.
a)surrender all illegal cards and devices
b)write a note saying you will never steal dss service again????
c)repaying for all service stolen.
Yup...They are going to ask for $3,500 for an out of court settlement or they will ask for $10,000 at court for each item you brought. They payments can be made in two parts $1,750 & 1,750 within 60 days.
If the letter found it's way to your house they know that you are the one that ordered it. DirectV sued and won the right to the records of several companies that sold these items over the internet. Any information the company had on you DirectV now has it.
Shoot me a pm or email me if you like...
If the letter found it's way to your house they know that you are the one that ordered it. DirectV sued and won the right to the records of several companies that sold these items over the internet. Any information the company had on you DirectV now has it.
Shoot me a pm or email me if you like...
powerforward
Well-known member
bump
powerforward
Well-known member
real scary.
powerforward
Well-known member
i would guess that only those that purchased over the internet.
the nature boy
New member
well that cetainly sucks.
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
chiba102 said:
You can add the Fed gov, CC comp. and Banks among other "Groups" on your list!
Yes unless those that "Gave" you your card have electronic or paper records! Always cover your tracks!
fogg88
New member
I'd like to know how they can prove that you actually used the merchandise to pirate DSS. An unlooper and a smart-card writer can be used for other purposes. An old H-card or HU-card and an old receiver are also perfectly legal to own. Even if you had a dish on your roof, pointed at the sky, that doesn't prove that you were actually stealing a signal. I'd like to see if someone will stand up to this and how it goes.
TheProject
New member
Yep...I've got a buddy who got one of these notices.
He took it to a lawyer, and the lawyer doesn't think they have a case. It's going to cost him to fight it, but the attorney's fees will be less than a settlement.
He took it to a lawyer, and the lawyer doesn't think they have a case. It's going to cost him to fight it, but the attorney's fees will be less than a settlement.
fogg88 said:
I don't think they have to prove that you used it just that you have it.
Mere possession of a signal theft equipment a violation of federal law in certain circumstances see
18 u.s.c. 2512(1)(b)
this is what they will use if they can not prove that you used it but that you ordered it and it was shipped to you.
This allows them to sue you for statutory damages of you to $10,000 per violation....so a card and emulator is $20,000 in damages. see
47 u.s.c 605(e)(3)
or if they can prove that you modified a device..programmed a card...the damages can go as high as $100,000
Last edited:
powerforward
Well-known member
it does sound more like a scare tactic, it seems that it would be very difficult to prove that you ever actually stole programming.
Firebaall
New member
It's an old game that they have been playing for a long time. What has happened, is the website that sold you equipment/reprogramed card, has been raided and was forced to give up it's records.
If you give them anything, you are pleaing guilty to a crime that they cannot prove. All you have to do, is say the card or equipment never arrived, or if they have record of delivery with your signed acceptance of delivery, say that it was educational equipment that was never used in an illegal manner.
Ignore the letter, if you end up having to make a court appearance, it will be short, and you can counter for legal fees/lost wages and even punitive damages for malicious prosecution.
Use your head, and don't let those bastards push you around.
If you give them anything, you are pleaing guilty to a crime that they cannot prove. All you have to do, is say the card or equipment never arrived, or if they have record of delivery with your signed acceptance of delivery, say that it was educational equipment that was never used in an illegal manner.
Ignore the letter, if you end up having to make a court appearance, it will be short, and you can counter for legal fees/lost wages and even punitive damages for malicious prosecution.
Use your head, and don't let those bastards push you around.
the nature boy
New member
supernav said:
maybe so. but the technology behind stealing directv and stealing mp3's is very different, directv is much easier.
so I've heard.
fini
Firebaall
New member
powerforward
Well-known member
what does it say?(you have to be a member to read)
Firebaall said:
You hit it right on the button. They cant prove shit. Hell I bought mine for a friend in mexico. Use the letter as toilet paper. I am actually glad they are sending letters out because that tells me they cant stop hackers and dave is getting desperate.
fogg88 said:
Firebaall
New member
powerforward said:
copy n' paste:
This is a copy/paste from another site, good reading. About Those Letters From Dave
...... If you received the Dave letter!!!
Let FTC know about it soon brothers.......
( Violations)
The Federal Trade Commission was called and verified that the bottom line is this, xxx can not send Letters/Documents that threaten legal action, make accusations of illegal wrongdoing, or threats in general. They also said they ON'T/CAN'T take action until they receive ENOUGH Complaints and the complaint form is on their website. Call this number to find out more information 1-877-382-4357 (federal trade commission help line) or go to
their web site. You don't have to use your real name but if you got the letter it wouldn't hurt. If enough complaints or letters from people are gotten soon, the FTC will take action on xxx . BUT
PEOPLE YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING FIRST AND
COMPLAIN or it won't do any good. So everybody just print it out and send it in, all that do will help the legal battle against xxx and this extortion scheme they are doing. Send in the complaint form even if you didn't get a letter yet.The more complaints the better.
http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/consumer.htm
Firebaall
New member
And:
Class Action Law Suit Has Been Filed Against DTV!!
This is an important update. A class action lawsuit was filed against Directv in the Los Angeles County Superior Court on October 28, 2002. The case number is BC284166. A copy of the Complaint will be posted on the Internet as soon as possible. What follows is a description of the lawsuit and what role, if any, you can play in it.
1. Class Action Lawsuit
The class action against Directv, Hughes, GM and other defendants alleges violations of three sets of California Laws.
a) All five named plaintiffs allege violations of California "Unfair Competition Law" contending the Demand Letters are:
(1) Unlawful because they constitute extortion within the meaning of California and federal law.
(2) Deceptive because they contained many factual misrepresentations and are capable of deceiving the unsophisticated recipient.
(3) Unfair because Directv's need to stop satellite piracy is not justified by this "carpet-bombing" type approach.
Relief sought is:
(1) Injunction against future letters.
(2) Restitution (refund) of any money paid to Directv. This is millions of dollars.
b) All five plaintiffs also allege violations of California Civil Rights laws. Basically, the plaintiffs contend the Letters were an attempt to interfere with the class members' civil rights to be free of extortion and defamation of character, etc.
Relief sought is statutorily set at $4,000 or $25,000 per letter.
Punitive Damages (unlimited) are also sought.
c) One plaintiff is representing the members of the Class who have already paid money in an additional cause of action for extortion. On this claim, a refund and punitive damages is also sought. There are technical reasons why this claim is important which cannot be discussed in this email/posting.
The lawsuit will probably take many months, or even a couple of years to resolve, but things may also happen much quicker, depending on Directv's reaction. Although the lawsuit is filed as a class action, it will probably take many months before the court determines if it should proceed as a class action. If the court later determines it is not a proper class action, then members of the class will have to consider bringing their own lawsuits or joining this one.
2. Directv's Bogus Theories of Liability
According to their Demand Letters and "draft complaint," Directv is relying upon three federal statutes that address wiretapping or electronical surveillance. What follows is my analysis of these statutes. This is not intended to be a complete and thorough analysis, but is just a general discussion of some perceived weaknesses. This does not constitute the giving of legal advice.
47 USC 605 prohibits receiving unauthorized receipt of encrypted satellite signals. It carries a penalty of up to $10,000. Unless Directv has evidence you actually watched unauthorized channels, this would seem to be a loser. Directv is arguing that a presumption of unauthorized viewing arises from the mere possession of the hardware that allows you to do it. They cite a case--Community Television Systems, Inc. v. Caruso (2d. Cir. 2002) 284 F.3d 430--which exposes a major flaw in their own reasoning.
In that case, a company selling cable box descramblers was raided and cooperated with the authorities by turning over the names and addresses of the customers who bought the boxes. The business records indicated the consumers had purchased "cable television descramblers" and the business owner testified he installed the units on the televisions, tuned to the proper channel to receive the cable transmissions. From those facts, the court indicated a rebuttable presumption arose that both husband and wife at the residence were liable, but this could be rebutted (the wife could say she had no idea what hubby was up to). Unfortunately, for Directv, it does not appear they have any witness to testify he came into your house and showed you how to use your smart card reader or unlooper to steal satellite programming. So the case is not helpful to Directv.
47 USC 605 also contains a section which carriers a penalty of up to $100,000, which Directv likes to use to scare people. This penalizes those who manufacturer, sell, modify, export, import, distribute, etc. devices knowing or having reason to know that the device or equipment is primarily of assistance in the unauthorized decryption of satellite cable programming. Putting aside the knowledge requirement, this section also does not apply to simple possession. That is why Directv accuses you of "modifying" a device. Excuse me, but they have never seen the device (unless you give it to them), so how do they know if you modified it?
Directv also relies upon 18 USC 2511 and 18 USC 2512. The first statute punishes unauthorized viewing so has the same problems discussed above. The second one is their best bet because it punishes possession of a device if you know or have reason to know
1) It's primarily useful to receive unauthorized satellite programming, and
2) It came in the mail (easy enough to prove)
Now Directv cannot win this case by bringing in an expert who says he knows an unlooper's primary use is to steal programming. Instead, Directv must show you should have known this primary function from the design of the item (i.e., its appearance, the diagrams or instructions that came with it, anything on the web page from which you ordered it, etc.)
You can see that simply showing you possessed a particular item is not sufficient.
The penalty for violating 2512 is $10,000 plus a chance of punitive damages, and attorney's fees and costs.
3. What Happens Next.
Everyone who has ever received one of these demand letters, anywhere in the nation, falls into one of the following categories.
(a) You have not settled and have not been served a filed lawsuit.
You have a couple of options.
1. Just wait and see what shakes out from the class action. I cannot tell you how likely it is that you will be sued (and when) if you ignore the letters. It does appear to me that, at least prior to my lawsuit, Directv was "picking up the pace" on some lawsuit filings. In a statement to the press on October 29th, a Directv spokesman said the letters will keep coming.
You do not need to actually join my lawsuit at this time. Later on, if the court determines it cannot proceed as a class action, then you may want to join at that time. If I have your information on file, I will make an attempt to contact you at that time. Make sure I have your name, address, phone numbers and email addresses. I will also need to know the answers to the five questions listed below under heading (c). Because you are members of the class I am seeking to represent, it is permissible for me to discuss your case with you. Please email, do not call unless absolutely necessary.
2. Hire a local attorney to negotiate a settlement or negotiate a settlement directly yourself.
I am not representing individuals in such settlement discussions. But if you are thinking about settling before being sued, I suggest you or your attorney email my office to discuss your options.
(b) You have actually been sued (served a real lawsuit, not the fake one) and have not settled.
You need to consult immediately with a local attorney knowledgeable in this area of law and make a decision. My lawsuit is not going to help you immediately. If you have a decent case, you should consider fighting all the way. Make Directv either dismiss unconditionally or lose. When Directv realizes it has filed a loser, it will probably come to you with an offer to drop all charges in exchange for mutual releases. At that point you might want to tell them to f&ck off. If you give them a release, then you will not be able to sue for malicious prosecution.
If you win your case, there is a good chance you will be able to sue Directv for malicious prosecution and seek reimbursement for your legal fees, your emotional distress damages, and punitive damages. My office would be happy to discuss bringing a malicious prosecution lawsuit (on a contingency fee basis) on behalf of anyone who has successfully defended against a Directv lawsuit.
If you do not have a good case, then you should discuss with your local attorney whether you should settle.
(c) You previously settled before being sued.
If you have already paid money (or forfeited valuable property) to Directv under duress and if you have a good explanation for your possession of the hardware in question, you should consider joining this lawsuit as soon as possible. Email me immediately for further details. Although you are already alleged to be a member of the class, it may be preferable that you become a named plaintiff.
The information you should provide is a copy of your settlement agreement (by fax or email) and answers to the following questions by email:
a. What exactly did you buy?
b. When and from where did you buy it?
c. What was the cost?
d. What was the purpose for buying it and to what use have you put it?
e. Did you subscribe to DirecTV at some point or now and do you have a satellite dish? And this is very important--if you have a DirecTV satellite dish and never subscribed to the service, then what is your legitimate explanation for that?
(d) You previously settled after being sued.
You could also contact me as indicated with (c), but you are not an ideal plaintiff as Directv will argue you settled because of the lawsuit not the letter. It might be best to wait to see if you can gain restitution or damages as a member of the class. You should just make sure I have your name, address and phone number and the answers to the above questions on file.
PLEASE NOTE THE FOREGOING EMAIL DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. I AM ADVISING INTERESTED PERSONS WHO HAVE REQUESTED INFORMATION OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION. YOU SHOULD CONSULT WITH A LOCAL ATTORNEY IF POSSIBLE.
Anything you tell me is completely confidential and protected by the attorney-client privilege.
Lakeshore Law Center
Jeffrey Wilens, Esq.
27758 Santa Margarita Pkwy.
No. 394
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
949-709-5330
949-709-5377 (fax)
_____________________________________
This message is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
For additional information, please visit our website at www.lawyers.com/lakeshorelaw
Class Action Law Suit Has Been Filed Against DTV!!
This is an important update. A class action lawsuit was filed against Directv in the Los Angeles County Superior Court on October 28, 2002. The case number is BC284166. A copy of the Complaint will be posted on the Internet as soon as possible. What follows is a description of the lawsuit and what role, if any, you can play in it.
1. Class Action Lawsuit
The class action against Directv, Hughes, GM and other defendants alleges violations of three sets of California Laws.
a) All five named plaintiffs allege violations of California "Unfair Competition Law" contending the Demand Letters are:
(1) Unlawful because they constitute extortion within the meaning of California and federal law.
(2) Deceptive because they contained many factual misrepresentations and are capable of deceiving the unsophisticated recipient.
(3) Unfair because Directv's need to stop satellite piracy is not justified by this "carpet-bombing" type approach.
Relief sought is:
(1) Injunction against future letters.
(2) Restitution (refund) of any money paid to Directv. This is millions of dollars.
b) All five plaintiffs also allege violations of California Civil Rights laws. Basically, the plaintiffs contend the Letters were an attempt to interfere with the class members' civil rights to be free of extortion and defamation of character, etc.
Relief sought is statutorily set at $4,000 or $25,000 per letter.
Punitive Damages (unlimited) are also sought.
c) One plaintiff is representing the members of the Class who have already paid money in an additional cause of action for extortion. On this claim, a refund and punitive damages is also sought. There are technical reasons why this claim is important which cannot be discussed in this email/posting.
The lawsuit will probably take many months, or even a couple of years to resolve, but things may also happen much quicker, depending on Directv's reaction. Although the lawsuit is filed as a class action, it will probably take many months before the court determines if it should proceed as a class action. If the court later determines it is not a proper class action, then members of the class will have to consider bringing their own lawsuits or joining this one.
2. Directv's Bogus Theories of Liability
According to their Demand Letters and "draft complaint," Directv is relying upon three federal statutes that address wiretapping or electronical surveillance. What follows is my analysis of these statutes. This is not intended to be a complete and thorough analysis, but is just a general discussion of some perceived weaknesses. This does not constitute the giving of legal advice.
47 USC 605 prohibits receiving unauthorized receipt of encrypted satellite signals. It carries a penalty of up to $10,000. Unless Directv has evidence you actually watched unauthorized channels, this would seem to be a loser. Directv is arguing that a presumption of unauthorized viewing arises from the mere possession of the hardware that allows you to do it. They cite a case--Community Television Systems, Inc. v. Caruso (2d. Cir. 2002) 284 F.3d 430--which exposes a major flaw in their own reasoning.
In that case, a company selling cable box descramblers was raided and cooperated with the authorities by turning over the names and addresses of the customers who bought the boxes. The business records indicated the consumers had purchased "cable television descramblers" and the business owner testified he installed the units on the televisions, tuned to the proper channel to receive the cable transmissions. From those facts, the court indicated a rebuttable presumption arose that both husband and wife at the residence were liable, but this could be rebutted (the wife could say she had no idea what hubby was up to). Unfortunately, for Directv, it does not appear they have any witness to testify he came into your house and showed you how to use your smart card reader or unlooper to steal satellite programming. So the case is not helpful to Directv.
47 USC 605 also contains a section which carriers a penalty of up to $100,000, which Directv likes to use to scare people. This penalizes those who manufacturer, sell, modify, export, import, distribute, etc. devices knowing or having reason to know that the device or equipment is primarily of assistance in the unauthorized decryption of satellite cable programming. Putting aside the knowledge requirement, this section also does not apply to simple possession. That is why Directv accuses you of "modifying" a device. Excuse me, but they have never seen the device (unless you give it to them), so how do they know if you modified it?
Directv also relies upon 18 USC 2511 and 18 USC 2512. The first statute punishes unauthorized viewing so has the same problems discussed above. The second one is their best bet because it punishes possession of a device if you know or have reason to know
1) It's primarily useful to receive unauthorized satellite programming, and
2) It came in the mail (easy enough to prove)
Now Directv cannot win this case by bringing in an expert who says he knows an unlooper's primary use is to steal programming. Instead, Directv must show you should have known this primary function from the design of the item (i.e., its appearance, the diagrams or instructions that came with it, anything on the web page from which you ordered it, etc.)
You can see that simply showing you possessed a particular item is not sufficient.
The penalty for violating 2512 is $10,000 plus a chance of punitive damages, and attorney's fees and costs.
3. What Happens Next.
Everyone who has ever received one of these demand letters, anywhere in the nation, falls into one of the following categories.
(a) You have not settled and have not been served a filed lawsuit.
You have a couple of options.
1. Just wait and see what shakes out from the class action. I cannot tell you how likely it is that you will be sued (and when) if you ignore the letters. It does appear to me that, at least prior to my lawsuit, Directv was "picking up the pace" on some lawsuit filings. In a statement to the press on October 29th, a Directv spokesman said the letters will keep coming.
You do not need to actually join my lawsuit at this time. Later on, if the court determines it cannot proceed as a class action, then you may want to join at that time. If I have your information on file, I will make an attempt to contact you at that time. Make sure I have your name, address, phone numbers and email addresses. I will also need to know the answers to the five questions listed below under heading (c). Because you are members of the class I am seeking to represent, it is permissible for me to discuss your case with you. Please email, do not call unless absolutely necessary.
2. Hire a local attorney to negotiate a settlement or negotiate a settlement directly yourself.
I am not representing individuals in such settlement discussions. But if you are thinking about settling before being sued, I suggest you or your attorney email my office to discuss your options.
(b) You have actually been sued (served a real lawsuit, not the fake one) and have not settled.
You need to consult immediately with a local attorney knowledgeable in this area of law and make a decision. My lawsuit is not going to help you immediately. If you have a decent case, you should consider fighting all the way. Make Directv either dismiss unconditionally or lose. When Directv realizes it has filed a loser, it will probably come to you with an offer to drop all charges in exchange for mutual releases. At that point you might want to tell them to f&ck off. If you give them a release, then you will not be able to sue for malicious prosecution.
If you win your case, there is a good chance you will be able to sue Directv for malicious prosecution and seek reimbursement for your legal fees, your emotional distress damages, and punitive damages. My office would be happy to discuss bringing a malicious prosecution lawsuit (on a contingency fee basis) on behalf of anyone who has successfully defended against a Directv lawsuit.
If you do not have a good case, then you should discuss with your local attorney whether you should settle.
(c) You previously settled before being sued.
If you have already paid money (or forfeited valuable property) to Directv under duress and if you have a good explanation for your possession of the hardware in question, you should consider joining this lawsuit as soon as possible. Email me immediately for further details. Although you are already alleged to be a member of the class, it may be preferable that you become a named plaintiff.
The information you should provide is a copy of your settlement agreement (by fax or email) and answers to the following questions by email:
a. What exactly did you buy?
b. When and from where did you buy it?
c. What was the cost?
d. What was the purpose for buying it and to what use have you put it?
e. Did you subscribe to DirecTV at some point or now and do you have a satellite dish? And this is very important--if you have a DirecTV satellite dish and never subscribed to the service, then what is your legitimate explanation for that?
(d) You previously settled after being sued.
You could also contact me as indicated with (c), but you are not an ideal plaintiff as Directv will argue you settled because of the lawsuit not the letter. It might be best to wait to see if you can gain restitution or damages as a member of the class. You should just make sure I have your name, address and phone number and the answers to the above questions on file.
PLEASE NOTE THE FOREGOING EMAIL DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. I AM ADVISING INTERESTED PERSONS WHO HAVE REQUESTED INFORMATION OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION. YOU SHOULD CONSULT WITH A LOCAL ATTORNEY IF POSSIBLE.
Anything you tell me is completely confidential and protected by the attorney-client privilege.
Lakeshore Law Center
Jeffrey Wilens, Esq.
27758 Santa Margarita Pkwy.
No. 394
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
949-709-5330
949-709-5377 (fax)
_____________________________________
This message is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
For additional information, please visit our website at www.lawyers.com/lakeshorelaw
powerforward
Well-known member
thanks for your insight.
Y_Lifter said:
Similar threads
