DirecTV Sues Anyone Who Bought Smartcard Reader? 1072
MImeKillEr writes "The Register is reporting that DirecTV is suing anyone known to have purchased a smartcard programmer, regardless of whether or not they're actually using the device to enable stealing their programming. They're sending out letters & when people call to clear up the confusion, DirecTV is demanding a $3500 settlement as well as the programming device. They've filed 9000 federal lawsuits against alleged pirates thus far. They're obtaining lists of who purchased the devices during raids against the sites that offer them for sale."
BARRATRY! (Score:5, Interesting)
--grendel drago
Why not? (Score:3, Interesting)
I mean, its sick-twisted-wrong but it makes sense unfortunatly.
Newsflash: (Score:4, Interesting)
Is this sensationalism or an honest mistake?
so... (Score:5, Interesting)
Outside their market? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So... (Score:2, Interesting)
Yep. (Score:5, Interesting)
That being said, they usually just demand money and the return of the equipment purchased. Of course the people they sue usually don't have the resources to fight the claims, so who knows if this will actually be tested in court?
Hrmmm..... (Score:2, Interesting)
Once again... (Score:5, Interesting)
Imagine, an innocent person buying a product that could be used to reprogram other equipment, such as an electronic control for art exhibits, or access control at the keyboard, is now threatened to pay thousands of dollars in damages because a corporation decided that piece of equipment can be used to violate their protection schemes (and the DMCA). The hapless individual, fearing more lawsuits in federal courts (thus costing even more than the original sum of money), decides to pay up to this bully to avoid more troubles...
Oh wait, that just happened. This is the kind of events we really should support the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) for. If you happen to know anyone who are harmed by this, let them know about the EFF.
I want to care, but the victims don't! (Score:5, Interesting)
You know, people like Sosa make this really difficult. DirecTV is doing something unethical, I believe. People are getting wrongfully accused in my opinion. But Sosa just rolled over and paid out $3500. These people are a problem because they help a bad system to stay bad. It makes it terribly difficult for me to have sympathy for someone who has such a lack of conviction, such a failed sense of justice. They don't care. Should we?
You pretty much have to settle (Score:3, Interesting)
I work with smart cards and I don't get it. (Score:5, Interesting)
Do I need something other than a PC attached smart card reader and a knowledge of how to send an APDU to the card to unloop it? What is it that makes the "programmer" special?
The term "smart card reader" often confuses those new to smart cards. All "smart card readers" are also "smart card writers" (a term which will give you away as a newbie) in that they can send information to the card and recieve information from it.
Legal? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it just me or does this sound highly illegal? When a place gets raided (assuming it was by law enforcement) doesn't law enforcement keep the evidence? Why would DirecTV of all people just be given this information when no laws have been proven broken? This sounds like another mockery of the justice system to me.
Re:Newsflash: (Score:4, Interesting)
For a little background, smartcards vary greatly in how "smart" they are. In fact, the first smartcards used in DirectTV systems were simple memory cards that had little or no tampering protection (they may of had a checksum for the ID number, but thats it). People used to put new cards on their devices and simply become another customer.
Later versions used encryption and/or public/private keys, which were much more difficult to hack, but some of these too can be hijacked like a man in the middle attack by putting a device between the card and the reader, but this is rare.
Personally, I find this hilarious. Let them go around suing people for all I care. All of the burdon of proof is on them to prove that you were stealing thier service. That would be very difficult to attempt if the person they were sueing did not do anything, like the sucker in the article that just wrote them a check.
Re:Haha (Score:2, Interesting)
Too late. The Register article already cited one person who paid up.
Is it illegal to possess it?
The DMCA states that posession of any device whose primary purpose is piracy is illegal. The real question here is if DirecTV can prove that the smart card programmers purchased are piracy devices and not just general-purpose programmers that are sometimes used for piracy.
Given that the devices in question were advertised and sold as piracy devices, the result is not that clear. The device is general-purpose, but its stated purpose is piracy. If the court concludes that it's a piracy device, then posession is illegal. If not, then DirecTV will have to prove that it was actually used for piracy, which is much more difficult.
This strikes a very similar parallel to DVD decryption software. It is general-purpose software (used for making player software as well as piracy). The MPAA's claim is that its primary purpose is piracy.
Re:If you can't do the time.... (Score:3, Interesting)
That's hardly a reasonable analogy. White flour is cheap. Programable smartcard programmers are not. I've purchased an ISO programmer from a shady canadian sateleite pirate dealer simply because they were considerably cheaper there than through other sources. If I could have gotten a programable programmer for $15 elsewhere I would have. Now I just have to hope DirecTV doesn't come after me since I'm a paying customer... You can't pirate a signal you're paying for, right?
Re:If you can't do the time.... (Score:3, Interesting)
stupid (Score:1, Interesting)
Anyway, Nintendo managed to get them shut down because their carts were "obviously" being used to pirate games. Never mind that 90% of their customers were game developers (such as myself). Those who were releasing commercial games were happy to get their hands on hardware cheaper than Nintendo was charging (with the 3rd party carts it cheap to get all our beta testers set up with the game - we bought maybe 20 and they could then test using off-the-shelf Gameboys); the hobbyist developers finally had a decent source of development hardware.
Which is exactly the same type of problem here. I'm not presuming 90% - but at least one person buying a smartcard reader probably had a legitimate purpose.
If there's a moral to this story could be: Don't charge too much for your product (DirectTV & cable companies). And destroy your customer order lists as soon as those orders are satisfied.
class action suit anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
What I'm curious about is if there is any organization of a class action suit against DirectTV, where the class is the people who have been incorrectly identified by DirectTV as pirates? They would most likely be liable for mental anguish and defamation as well (seriouslly, blaming someone for being a pirate could be very damaging to them, especially to buisiness people).
Here's to hopin'
Conspiracy theory:Smartcard readers = sales ploy (Score:5, Interesting)
My wife seeing "All the channels" kept insisting that we get the same system. I reluctantly agreed to let her do it (I thought our cable was just fine though) How could one go wrong with the setup though? Every channel on direct TV (including playboy =D ) for the price of a basic subsciption.
Well about a month after we got the system we started to have problems. Dish networks sent out a signal that required us to reprogram the card. No problem, just insert the card into the programmer, attatch to computer and run a few things to update it... Cool works again. You could never tell when or where they were going to strike with the "zap signal" again. Sometimes I would come home, flip on the TV and get an error message. Nothing more irritating than having to reprogram your card every time you sit down to watch TV.
Then the zap signals got worse, they didn't just fry the smartcard, they actually fried the flash on the base unit. So we would be without TV for a week or so while we waited for our roomates cousin to come over, take the box apart, put some hokey looking things with pins across the pins of the flash chip and reflash the unit.
She would start the most ill logic fights with me "DON'T WATCH TV WHEN YOU GET HOME OR WE'LL GET ZAPPED!" she would tell me. WTF is it for then if not to watch it? (I don't think it really mattered if I was watching or not, the unit seems to be in a constant on state)
After 4 months of this shit, I finally gave up on the card reader. I set all our cards back to thier defaults and tossed them in my junk pile. I told my wife I better not catch her using it again or I would just rip the entire dishTV system out and there would be NO TV.
Now she won't get rid of the damn thing for the sake of argument. I told her from the get go I didn't really think it was a keen idea, and I think the only reason we're keeping it past the 1 year contract is because she doesn't want to admit it was a stupid purchase.
Well anyways, our roomates cousin sold a lot of these 1 year subscriptions this way. Despite knowing the problems with it, he still continues to use this as a sales device to this day. We've had a number of friends that went for "all the channels" only to come home to a black screen or an error message.
I just think it's irony that they're suing people for buying into their #1 sales hook. Hook line and sinker.
DirecTV logic (Score:2, Interesting)
I suppose I could use the same logic and walk into a crowded room, yell out a bunch of stuff, and then sue everyone for listening in without my permission.
I would be equally pissed at the vendor (Score:3, Interesting)
Okay, probably the smart card vendors didn't get paid by DTV for the customer list, but I would be mighty angry if they gave MY info to the DirectTV goons for this exortion.
If i had to buy a smart card reader, I would pay in cash. And no, I don't want to sign up for a catalog of special smart card reader offers.
So what lesson did we learn? Pay in cash for legally questionable items, such as the big bad smart card reader, or hydroponics equipment.
Here's a better one... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Website for targetted consumers (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:1, Interesting)
Whatever you beam into my house and body is MINE (Score:4, Interesting)
The whole premise is wrong in my opinion, I think I should be able to do what I want with things people give to me or leave on my property.
If you are beaming your signals into my property, my house, my body, my kids, etc, I will damn well do what I please with them!
I almost have a duty to intercept them and decode them and make sure they are not harmful in anyway.
If they arrived unsolicited in the physical mail they would be mine to keep by federal law no questions asked.
You don't want me to do anything with them?? Then keep them off my land and out of my body, problem solved.
These are physical radio waves, you are dumping them on my property and I can't do what I want with them?
I dont think so....
Re:You pretty much have to settle (Score:3, Interesting)
- You used a lawyer, or
- You lost the case.
If you did have a valid reason for owning the device, and you paid for all of the channels, then this could have been resolved simply without actually getting the legal system involved. Firstly, you write back saying `see you in court'. Next, you send to their lawyers:- A copy of your DirecTV bills for the last year.
- A copy of the sunray manual (with the pasages about the use of the smartcard reader highlighted).
- A covering letter saying that you will be presenting this evidence in court, but if they drop the case, and provide you with a written appology and $3500 in compensation, then you will not persue a claim of $100000 in damages for barratry against them.
If, after this, their lawyer advises them to persue the case then they should get new lawyers.I'll be waiting on my letter... (Score:2, Interesting)
And you people stood by.... (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:They are gonna have a hard time.... (Score:5, Interesting)
See, because you were actually intelligent in going about purchasing this stuff. I can't tell you how many sob stories I've heard from people in the "hobby" about the "letter." In the last 2-3 years, the DTV hacking market just blew up bigtime, and there were tons of sites that were selling equipment. In the mad rush to beat the competition, a ton of these places actually started accepting credit cards. WTF... The standard had always been money orders, find a reputable dealer (that isn't base in the U.S. dummies!!), buy your stuff, and have it sent to a safe address.
Now you've got thousands of people with letters, dealers and fulfillment houses raided, and a bunch of dumb m***erf**kers that can't figure out how they got busted.
While I totally disagree with the tactics that DTV is employing, all I can say is what in the f**k do you guys expect?!?!
Simple fact is that the letters that these people got were not sent because they bought a generic smart card reader/writer. They bought devices with (usually) Atmel AT90S2313-10PC I.C.'s on them which were programmed with a flash that had no other purpose than to circumvent the security on a DTV access card. Now, I don't have a problem with DTV getting ripped off; I could care less. But the fact remains that these devices are illegal access devices, and as such, are illegal. Sucks, yeah, but that's why you have to be f**king careful when you buy this stuff!!!!
I *was* going to be a DTV customer ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:They are gonna have a hard time.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Legal extortion. (Score:3, Interesting)
You haven't been in court much, have you?
This means frequent breaks while the judge explains what various things mean, proper procedure, form for questions, etc. Ten people representing themselves in court would be disasterous to a judge's schedule. A thousand people doing the same will clog the system so badly
The judge will go out of his way not to help someone who doesn't know shit just as much as he will go out of his way not to help a smart lawyer. There are exceptions, but I clerked for a judge (whom I greatly respect), and as much as he wanted to sometimes, he would not do anything for them beyond judge what was properly before him. To do otherwise violates every principle that matters to judges.
In short, if you go into court with the idea that a judge will explain things to you at all or help you in any way if you are pro se, you are going to walk out without being concerned about constipation ever again.
GF.
Counter sue for preventative cancer costs... (Score:3, Interesting)
The neighbors on both sides of me have DirecTV dishes, and since they get good reception I know the waveforms must be penetrating my house, and thus myself and my family. If we magically develop cancer 20 years from now, who's to say it wasn't that particular does of radiation that caused it?
As long as the US still wants to pretend to be a democracy (rather than the commercial Oligarchy it really is), anything which enters my home belongs to me, and provided that my doing so doesn't infringe on other rights (making money is not a right!), I can use that signal however I choose. Heck, if I don't record it, I'm not even violating any copyright laws since I'm using the original signal, not a copy.
Alas, I don't have DirecTV... I am stuck with cable, so it's a moot point anyways. Maybe when they start suing everyone who bought a television, since they MIGHT be watching something that was once pirated from DirecTV....
Re:Whatever you beam into my house and body is MIN (Score:3, Interesting)
Fine by me, that's why I left the WAP open.
What if you had used WEP and I cracked it and got onto your network
You can passively crack all the WEP signals you want. I don't care, but I would think that cracking the resource AND using it would be some kind of trespass since there was no implied consent. A similar logic would apply to a cordless phone base station.
Please excuse me while I step back into my faraday cage.
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:2, Interesting)
I am somewhat worried about this whole affair because I did purchase one of these devices. Some years ago a visitor to my website that deals with microcontrollers wrote me asking about how to write microcontroller programs for smartcards. I didn't even know, until then, that smartcards HAD microcontrollers. So I immediately became excited at the possible applications and went out and bought one of these devices since I was going to play with the technology and, perhaps, come up with new products. Or at the very least expand my own microcontroller knowledge.
Now it turns out that DirecTV is threatening anyone that purchased one of these devices. I don't doubt that many or even most people that purchase(d) them do so for less than legitimate uses, but there ARE those of us who have legitimate uses for them. The problem is that the article seems to suggest that DirecTV isn't interested in talking about it. They just ask you to pony up $3500. Otherwise they sue you for $10k plus fees. That's absurd.
I haven't received one of these letters, but if I do then I'm definitely going to have to talk to my lawyer about what to do. It's bogus because $3500 is certainly going to be less than to defend my legal use of the device. At that point, it's extortion. DirecTV offers a settlement at a price point they know is less than what it will cost anyone to defend themselves so even innocent people just decide to cave and send them a check for $3500. But that's so much BS being in a position to have to pay DirecTV $3500 because if they sue you it's going to cost more.
I don't have DirecTV, Dish, or cable. I don't even live in the U.S. right now. But if/when I move back to the U.S. I can guarantee you I WON'T be subscribing to DirecTV regardless of whether or not I ever receive one of these letters.
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, there are many legitimate reasons, but it sure doesn't cover a lot of the garbage that they are into these days, and it seems to me that "revocation of corporate charter for not contributing substantially to society" should be put back on the books. Under that law a corporation must periodically prove that it's existence is a net benefit to society.
(I forget the exact phrasing, and the exact terms used...but corporations used to have a very conditional existence.)
Editorial comments by Taco are incorrect (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's an analogy:
It is illegal to buy things that are sold as illegal drugs, even if they are not drugs. For instance, if I buy flour from a dealer thinking it is coke, I go to jail for trying to buy drugs.
Now. Let's say that I am in a swanky neighborhood and I need some flour for a tart. My next door neighbor is Pablo Escobar. I know he has flour, because I called him and asked. He sells it cheaply, too, even cheaper than my local grocer. So, I walk across the street and buy flour from Pablo (thinking that it is flour, and it is). Pablo put it in a plastic bag, because he always seems to have those.
I start to walk out of the house, and the cops raid the place. I get busted for trying to buy drugs. Now maybe I have a perfectly innocent reason for being where I am with what I have, but it sure looks bad, doesn't it? If I had been caught in the same circumstances and the occupant of the house was Ned Flanders and the cops were looking for a rapist, I wouldn't be in trouble, most likely. Is it wrong that this difference exists?
Our courts are not truth detectors. There is no magic crystal that glows in the presence of honesty. Past experience and facts are all that a court can rely upon to make judgment calls.
The facts here are that all of the dealers here were shut down for peddling illegal pirate TV devices. Their customer records were pulled and showed buyers and what the buyers bought. Maybe some of them are innocent, but most of them absolutely were trying to steal tv signals. They are now caught up in civil cases, where the burden of proof is lower than in criminal cases and Directv has some pretty damning circumstantial evidence. It is (rightly) on the shoulders of the defendants to put up or shut up and pay up.
Mod me down if you want, but it won't change my mind that these people are, for the most part, thieves that are trying to justify their conduct after the fact.
GF.
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:5, Interesting)
Well I for one would be happy to pay for advertising-free TV.
But the greed here is incredible. Where do people get this notion that they have a legally enforceable right to make a profit off a bad business model?
DTV has several options as I see them. They can write off the 'pirating' as inevitable and ignore it, concentrating on sucking the honest customers dry. They can change their offerings to compete better with the 'pirate' offers. Or they can use cartooneys to threaten everyone in sight hoping this will somehow make them more money than it costs.
Apparently they're choosing door number 3, which I think is pretty dumb, but not surprising really.
If I were them I'd try something a little more creative. What is the draw to the 'pirate' cards? You get access to whatever channels you want, for a one-time fee, instead of paying out the ass for the super-deluxe top of the line package every month just for the one channel you actually watch, am I right?
Plus there is the element of everyone wanting to feel like they're the smart one, getting the forbidden fruit cheap while the other chumps pay big bucks month after month... I'm sure that's an element.
Now remember, these 'pirates' are paying, they're just paying lump sums instead of recurring fees, and they're paying them to someone else. That's the problem, from DTVs point of view, if they would just look at it clearly.
So, what I would do if I were them, is just start a little subsidiary. Hide the ownership, yo don't have to do anything illegal, just the kind of obfuscation any corporate lawyer or accountant knows how to do, so that it's not obvious. Have this little subsidiary get into the pirate card business. Have your techs working on breaking pirate cards, of course, as they've done all along. But have your techs and your subsidiary work together, so that most of the time when you break the other pirate cards those sold by your subsidiary don't break. Still break them sometimes, of course, so you get a round of upgrade sales, but make sure your own cards get the reputation for being the ones that usually don't break.
Pretty soon, not only are you getting the regular fees from your ordinary subscribers, you also own the pirate decoder market as well. Now remember, they're working in a market where most of the costs are fixed. It costs them the same amount to run that programming whether they have 1 subscriber or one million subscribers. They have the exact same costs whether there are no 'pirates' or 10 or 100 or a million as well. So this extra income is pure gravy.
Take it from someone who knows (Score:5, Interesting)
I was served at work, where i am a unofficial IT guy, with my fellow co-workers looking on as if i were a dangerous criminal. (Embarassing does not even begin to explain the feeling.) My first reaction was, WTF is this? I have never been sued before, i have never been in any kind of trouble before, hell, i have not had a speeding ticket in over 10 years. . . . but low and behold, here was a document stating that i am being sued for $120,000 by a company that i have been a long standing customer with for many years. As i read on, i found out that it was for a Smart Card Programmer. Once again that WTF feeling came back. . . . I purchased this equipment over 2 years ago for a security project that never got off of the ground. A company that i worked for wanted a better way to keep control over who used the company network, i found some info on smart cards, did a search for "smart card programmer" and purchased the cheapest unit i could find. (about $160 if memory serves me correctly), Only to find out that it would not work for what i wanted to do. And now im being sued! And as i said earlier, i am a DTV customer, have been for 6 years. If i were going to hack TV cards, you would think that i would do mine first!
Just to make one thing clear, I am a poor guy, And as a poor guy, there are not many options for me to take. Anyway, i dont want to rant about this, however i believe that it is a great injustice. This is just extortion, plain and simple. I was told that i could settle for $4,500 before i went to court, or $10,000 after the court process had began. Alternatively, i could fight it, and the cheapest lawyer would be on the average of $15,000 by the time it is all over. Obviously, not a "poor boy" option. And since it is a civil case, i am not entitled to a court appointed lawyer. So the only option left for me is to fight it myself. Which, if any of you have ever looked into the paperwork involved in a Federal Civil Case, looks like i have just over a snowball's chance in hell.
So if i go to court and loose, by law, they can take what little i have, and then some. One option that they could take is garnishment, and being that this is a Lawsuit for damages, they could take a chunk of my pay check for the next 25 years! I only make $12 an hour now, and have a wife and 2 kids, so this is not a good thing for a person who is just barely making it. This Lawsuit is designed to crush people like me so that people who have the money to pay the ransom, will do so.
Re: Probable cause. (Score:5, Interesting)
I bought a reader and a number of crypto cards directly from a manufacturer, as part of a Linux SDK kit.
I have never owned a dish system. I have continuously had a cable TV connection in my current resident (close to 10 years), a townhouse oriented in a manner that would make it difficult to set up a dish.
I have been involved in Unix/Linux security systems for a number of years.
I have discussed X.509 certificate authorities countless times in the past, and suggested that crypto cards would be good root certificates for small CAs. (The private key never leaves the cards, when you don't need them you toss them into a safe or safety deposit box, etc.)
Now tell me again where there is any probable cause in my case. I haven't gotten that letter yet, but if I do I'll demand the court award them to compensate me for any and all defense costs because there isn't a shred of probable cause in my case.
To be honest, I was surprised to learn that the dish systems use the same cards I had already purchased for use in experimenting with setting up a PAM module to recognize smart cards - I want something a lot like Solaris where you have to insert the card and enter your passphrase, and when you yank your card out you're automatically logged out. In the long run, it would also be nice to be able to store SSH RSA/DSA keys on the card, etc.
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:4, Interesting)
If they are asking the State to press a criminal case against you, then yes. They could never reach the standard of proof needed for the case to even see the inside of a court room.
However, if this is being brought as a civil suit, the standards of proof are not so high.
Open letter to Rob Mercer of DirecTV (Score:1, Interesting)
-----
Mr. Mercer,
Regarding this statement:
"I have to say, how innocent is someone who goes to website that is clearly identified as a pirate website that is devoted to selling equipment to steal satellite TV programming, and orders the equipment, knowing full well what they're getting?" says Mercer. "That's quite a stretch."
Suppose I want to buy a gun, and I do the research to identify the kind of gun that I want. I find a store that has the gun I want for the same price as everyone else, but the guy behind the counter (which is, by the way, festooned with a"kill the [racial slur]s" poster) offers me an even better deal: the gun itself, plus a high-powered telescoping sight that he suggests "would be perfect for letting you kill someone -- or something -- at a distance". Now, I'm disgusted by his attitude and by the posters, but boy, that telescoping sight is really really cool, and I can't get it anywhere else, so I make the purchase and happily go off to hunt lions and tigers and bears, oh my.
Now, should I be arrested for murdering people, because I bought the gun and sight from someone who openly thinks that murdering people is a good idea? Should I be sued in civil court for promoting racial violence because I made the purchase there? I would be interested to hear if you can justify it. Just remember, you can't compare it to an illegal gun purchase, because the devices in question are not illegal -- just like most devices that have legitimate and illegitimate uses.
I am a DirecTiVo subscriber, and have been for some time. Tonight, I'll be doing my best to convince my wife that it's time to move on to something better, like less TV or the local cable affiliate. In the meantime, you might want to consider that your company has become an extortionist. I would imagine your shareholders are pleased, since this extortion increases actual revenue by extracting settlements from the innocent along with the guilty in a fashion that covers the cost of operations, while potential revenue lost to pirating can never be turned into actual revenue by any legitimate means. But you already knew that -- after all, I've been a subscriber for years, and you haven't made $3,500 out of me yet.
Re:CD Burners (Score:3, Interesting)
Since an active dose is around 100 *micro*grams, anybody who gets busted with LSD *always* gets done for major trafficking.
It's fucked, but then so is the whole game.
Re:Take it from someone who knows (Score:3, Interesting)
You might want to contact that old company, if they're still in business, and tell them what's going on. If they have legal council, and it's explained that this reader was bought during the course of a project from them, you might get some free legal advice or (unlikely) some representation.
I know that there are lawyers who read /. Where are you guys? You should be chomping at the bit to help this guy out!
To the poster: please keep us posted. I'm sure I'm not alone when I say I'd be willing to donate some money for a legal defense fund if you stipulated: (1) that any monies left over after defense were donated to the EFF or OSF; (2) a portion of any monies recovered in damages, if any, were likewise donated to the EFF or OSF; and (3) that you really stick it to the fuckers if you can.
Please, please, please! Keep us posted.
Re: Probable cause. (Score:2, Interesting)
I would really like to setup something like that for my backup server with loop-aes hacked in there.
It would rock my world if you could point this out to me.
Old news..... (Score:1, Interesting)
DirectTV sent out letters to people that they were suing. In the manner in which they did it, many people believed it to be a scam so they did not reply. The courts ruled that anyone that does not respond automatically is ordered to pay the settlement ammount.
Many of the people are now trying to fight the judgement for a few reasons:
DirectTV filed a lawsuit on every customer they found in the company's records that theyve raided without asking:
did the people recieve the product?
did they use it to steal DirectTV broadcasts?
did they use it for legitimate use?
There are many other questions they chose not ask.
This is just another way that Big Companies can do what they please without regard for the constitution. You can thank the corrupt American legal system and our wonderful politicians.
Thank you America, Thank you!
It happened to me, but I didn't do anything wrong! (Score:1, Interesting)
In the quickest of analogies I would like to point out the error in the way DTV is doing business in this situation.
"A man walks into a gun shop and buys a gun with the intention of harming someone other than himself. The man comes to his senses before committing this atrocious act. Should the man be arrested for simply having the gun or for buying it, even though he did nothing wrong?"
This is exactly what happened to me. I will admit a friend told me about doing this exact thing. I started buying the necessary components, but lost interest as I knew it was not a good idea. I'm not Mr Perfect, but I have some moral compass. Anyway I get said letter and in short time clear it up without paying a dime, because I did nothing wrong, besides buying the device.
My real comment is that I though we were all Innocent until proven Guilty? If the device in question is not illegal then how can someone be sued when they have done nothing wrong.
Just my thoughts and ramblings.
DirecTV can't afford to lose the lawsuit (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:3, Interesting)
> libel (assuming you really are innocent).
Yes, the truly massive numbers of people who bought smart card writers and didn't use them to get free DirecTV (note, not DirectTV) will completely swamp them with libel suits.
A cricket chirps...
Re:BARRATRY! (Score:3, Interesting)
Have any of the alleged dmca cases gone to court other than adobe's? I haven't heard of many that made it to the jury phase. The best way to keep a bad law from being tested is to keep it away from a jury.
I have canceled my DirecTV subscription today (Score:2, Interesting)
I know, i'm only one customer, so not a big loss, but at least i can sleep tonight.
Thomas
Re:Take it from someone who knows (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously. Your government has gone looney, and corporations are running amuck. It's simple not worth living there anymore.
When enough sensible people either (a) leave the country or (b) revolt, things will be forced to change.
Re:I have canceled my DirecTV subscription today (Score:2, Interesting)
The more people hear about this, the more will cancel their subscriptions, and the more likely DirecTV will get the message that this is a BAD idea. They will end up losing WAY more money by pursuing this kind of tactic than by taking the time and effort to investigate who they are after and determining whether they really are pirates.
To all you DirecTV subscribers, this is the kind of action that will really get the message through. No matter how good their service is, is it worth the price we will be paying as a society if this kind of corporate bullying isn't stopped?
Together, we can make a difference.
Re:They are gonna have a hard time.... (Score:3, Interesting)
The ISO smart card reader I bought is not illegal, and it should never be made illegal. If they are, I guess I will have to throw out the Toshiba laptop I have with a reader BUILT IN. And all of the other devices that read smart cards. I guess the door to my lab will be illegal too.
MY GOD, DIRECTV WANTS TO TAKE OVER MY LAB!