Slashdot Log In
$180 Million for Piracy Conspiracy
Posted by
michael
on Sat Jun 28, 2003 04:00 PM
from the arrrr-matie dept.
from the arrrr-matie dept.
theCoder writes "According to an AP story printed in the Orlando Sentinel, Steven R. Frazier has been ordered to pay $180 million restitution for attempting to sell a device that would decrypt the satellite signals sent into everyone's homes. In addition to spending the next 5 years in Federal prison, Frazier will have to pay $500 a month for the next 30,000 years, though no one really expects him to live long enough to make all the payments. That value is based on estimated loses DirectTV and Echostar may have incurred had Frazier been able to sell his devices. Being ordered to pay restitution for actual damages is one thing, but paying for some made up number of future damages? Maybe if I catch someone trying to break into my car, I can sue him for the damage he would have caused if he succeeded..."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
$180 Million for Piracy Conspiracy
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 734 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
too harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Saturday December 25 2004, @10:07PM)
they don't put people to death for attempted murder, do they? that seems a little harsh to me.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Funny)
No, but sometimes they do issue more than one death sentence. I guess they do that just in case being dead once already isn't enough.
Re:too harsh (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.filejournal.com/)
Another reason for this is making the sentence stick. If one of the crimes was successfully appealed, the sentence for the other(s) would still stand.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Informative)
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.brianosaurus.org/)
In this case, there was a trial, and the guy was planning to sell a device. Maybe what he was doing was illegal, and maybe he deserves a jail sentence.
But the court stopped him before any damages were incurred. The actual damages to the satellite companies is zero. Being ordered to pay $180 million in "potential damages" is absurd.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
Where you get punished for doing things you MIGHT have done, if the superior police force hadn't nabbed you before your little malicious ideas came to fruition!
100% Accurate!
Gah, it's always scary when a movie plot comes true in real life....
OK So maybe the guy "deserved" to get punished, because he was "intentionally" building a device that was designed to "hack" into signals, but the fact is he's being held accountable for things that never happened, except in The Magical Fairyland of DirectTV's wild imagination.
Re:too harsh (Score:4, Insightful)
A man who schemed to steal satellite television signals now has something much bigger than a cable bill to pay -- a whopping $180 million restitution order on which he is to make $500 monthly payments.
He's not being charged the full $180 million (which is probably excessive, but it really doesn't matter) he's being charged $500 a month for life. That charge really isn't inflated.
It costs Dish Networks around $500 to aquire a single new customer. That $500 represents the cost of advertising, instalation (which is done for free), discounts on equipment, and other incentives. Since most Dish and DirecTV plans involve your ownership of the equipment once you're on the plan the companies have no way to recoup that cost if you can pirate the signal.
This guy is being charged the rather reasonable amount of $500. If that means his device ends up being used by one new Dish or DirecTV customer every month, they will break even.
He got off easy.
As a disclaimer, I am currently an employee of Echostar Dish Networks. As my views are not necessarily those of my employer I am posting this anonymously.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.brianosaurus.org/)
And a common theory is that the people who would have used that device will find alternatives and wouldn't have signed up with Dish/DirectTV anyway. Granted, that's just speculation, but then again so is their $900million number.
And while he won't ever actually pay out $180 million at $500/month, its still on the books. It still sets a ridiculous precedent, and might encourage other industries to use this sort of business model.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
I know, lets send the cops out, and just give out speeding and parking tickets at random. 'cause, everyone was planning on speeding that day, and everyone will at some time park illegally.
You'll be first in line to pay your thoughtcrime fines right?
Re:too harsh (Score:4, Interesting)
This "potential" damage crap is just ludicrous. I don't give a rat's ass what some employee from one of the Dish companies thinks to the contrary.
Anything else takes us down the path to thought control.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Informative)
Mickey D's had the temperature of their coffee for years at over 180+ degrees...at least that is what they served it at. At that temperature, a third degree burn occurs in seconds if the coffee is spilled on someone
The million dollars the plaintiff was awarded in that case was the amount McD's made on coffee in one day. The whole issue was that because of the temperature of McD's coffee (which is hotter that Starbucks), there were somewhere in the ballpark of 600 to 800 severe burns.
The theory is, if punishing McD's finacially causes them to either make better spill proof lids or but coffee cups that keep the temperature hot enough for a long time without having to make the temperature so hot, then this would prevent 600 to 800 severe burns a year
And yes, it worked, McD's improved their lids, their cups, and decreased the temperature of the coffee. I don't remember how much this cut down on severe burns a year, but its was over an 80% decrease.
Additionally, because of this case, other fast found joints, i.e. BK lounge, also changed their coffee lids, cups, and temperature....Starbucks and Caribou coffee then implemented the policy of never giving a drink to a patron unless the top is on it...
So, because of the McD's coffee case, which seemed completely ridiculous to me too at the time...actually had a greater impact in saving money in medical cost and other social cost from severe burns by getting those that serve coffee to implement some preventive measures.
A lot of severe burns caused by accidents have been prevented because of that one case....Don't always think a case that sounds absurd doesn't have some other positive impact...
Re:too harsh (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.brianosaurus.org/)
also, its not a fine, but a "retribution payment", payed to the satellite networks. But since they didn't lose anything, they aren't owed anything. any amount is excessive in this case.
Re:too harsh (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://antitux.us/)
It's *REALLY* fucking difficult to pay 500 bucks a month on top of rent, bills, etc., when all you have is a job at mcdonalds.
I find that cruel, and excessive.
punishment fitting the crime (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.kernelspace.co.uk/)
Re:punishment fitting the crime (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.etoyoc.com/yoda | Last Journal: Tuesday June 10 2003, @10:53AM)
Well don't we all wish we could abdicate [reference.com][dictionary.com] the death penalty. Now if you were advocating [reference.com][dictionary.com] the death penality I'd have issues.
Sorry. I just couldn't resist being a grammer snob. This is gonna cost me some karma...
Re:punishment fitting the crime (Score:5, Funny)
I take it you're not familiar with divorce settlements?
Re:punishment fitting the crime (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe for you in your nice cushy job, but some of us barely make that at all much less being able to pay bills/buy food/etc after that. Think before you speak asswipe, there are people a lot worse off than you and if 500 a month is change for you there's a lot of us.
Maybe this'll make people think before they steal IP in future.
Except he didn't steal any IP, nor did he even plan to. He had plans to potentially release a device that potentially allowed others to steal access to satellite TV. Maybe we should just go ahead and declare marshal law since everyone could potentially be a murderer.
How? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.last.fm/user/RJ)
remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Corporations are getting out of fucking hand.
Attempting to commit a crime is not a crime... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Read this [ncwc.edu] explanation from a political science professor, for instance, and try not to be confused. The author, in attempting to reconcile the absurd acts of modern legislatures with actual legal theory, has even managed to confuse himself:
What? He admits that a crime of omission cannot exist because it is an oxymoron. This conclusion is dependent upon the basic definition of crime that has existed since time immemorial: crime requires injury. An injury is an act committed against someone that results in harm to them.
Not doing something is not a crime; it isn't even an act. Yet, implicit also in the acceptance of "prescribed" rules of conduct being punishable as "crimes" is the acceptance of "crimes of omission," which he himself states is an oxymoron.
Thinking about doing something isn't an act, either. It would be more properly termed a thought crime, regardless of what Mr. Gates [slashdot.org] says.
It should be obvious that even the intellectual charlatans who affix themselves to the coattails of oppressive governments and attempt to explain logically it's actions cannot, in the process, help but become confused themselves.
The Lawnmower Man (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://burningwell.org/)
The Shire of Kalamunda [holiday-wa.net] (satellite city in Perth, Western Australia) has (or had) a bizarre law on its books that specified a fine for operating a two or four stroke motor between midnight and midnight on Sundays. Why so specific? Why only Sundays?
It turns out that this particular law is due to a single councilor [wa.gov.au] who lived in sunny Bickley, in Kalamunda's East Ward. Said Councillor was in the habit of going out and "raging" (nightclubbing, partying etc) every Saturday night, coming home at silly- o'clock on Saturday morning (or sometimes holding the party at his house and keeping his neighbours up to silly o'clock), and expecting to sleep in until the sun was over the crow's-nest.
The sand in this particular vaseline was his many Seventh-day Adventist neighbours [wa.gov.au], who after enjoying a refreshingly restful Sabbath day between sunset Friday and sunset Saturday would get up early on Sunday morning, full of beans, vim vigour and vitality, and start doing stuff. Like mowing their lawns not before 07:00 as per the excessive noise laws.
Three or more neighbours running two-stroke mowers was not exactly what Mr I-went-to-bed-at-04:23 wanted to hear at 07:00, so he acted. He went out and talked to his neighbours about it - not. Instead, he talked the Shire into enacting a "Blue Law [wikipedia.org]" prohibiting the operation of two-stroke motors throughout the Shire between midnight and midnight on Sundays.
Not to be outdone in the lets-resolve-this stakes, and of course turning their collective backs on 1Thessalonians5:14-15 [gospelcom.net], the dawn chorus in Bickley the following Sunday included a four-stroke-mowers section from all of his neighbours. Taking care not to abuse his position as Councillor, Mr I-went-to-bed-at-04:23 then had the law amended to include four-stroke motors.
The consequences included that as he was driving his car home at 04:07 on Sunday morning, he broke his own law. Any propellor-driven aircraft flying over the Shire were in violation, and so on. I don't think he realised how lucky he was that turbine-driven mowers are still hard to buy. (-:
Land of the free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Land of the free? (Score:5, Funny)
Man this dude's gonna be pissed when we discover the secret to immortality in 50 years time!
To a Certain Extent It Makes Sense (Score:3, Insightful)
Murder or robbery is a bad example. Everyone knows how to do it, there isn't much special knowledge involved.
It's very, very apples to oranges.
Re:To a Certain Extent It Makes Sense (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.myspace.com/mypetmachinemusic)
Did the information get free? Did the [sarcasm]poor corporations[/sarcasm] lose a lot of money? You don't put people to death if they don't actually kill someone. similarly, you ought not be fined for money that could have been lost, but wasn't.
food for thought: cable descramblers aren't that hard to come by, yet cable companies, cable networks, etc. seem to be doing just fine. I doubt that had this information gotten out that it would have spelled the end of DirecTV, or even cost them that much.
They're already spreading it around (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.rootrecords.org/)
A device like this should be completely legal. Apples to apples? It's like me reciting my own copyrighted poetry in France and then suing any bilingual Frenchman for not paying for my official translator.
Does this make anyone else sick? (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Many of the people that were part of this scheme dont have the money to pay for satellite legally. They chose the illegal option because it was what they can afford. Thus it is not lost revenue to the companies since these people would never have paid full price.
The same goes with things like.... ohh.. say mp3's. I would not go out and buy a cd. I have a perfecty good radio and am happy to listen to that.
Just my $0.02