Well, I got a follow-up to the infamous "Letter" [Archive]

morgana

January 3rd, 2002, 06:56 PM

Well how brave do you feel?
The unlooper is exactly as the words describe. It is a unit that will remove the loop that DTV sent to your card (you are the owner, not DTV)and they damaged it. Since this is the same as DTV throwing a rock through your tv screen so you can not watch tv, they should have been responsible for the damage they did with their ECM. Since arguing with a company like DTV over the repair, you sought other ways to correct the problem. Once this was done th ecards orignal ID was put on the card and it was then sold to someone, that said they were going to subscribe to DTV with. DTV can not stop you from repairing your own property, and they can not force you to deal only with them on repairs.

You may want to counter with the cost of the unlooper as it was their actions that damaged your card. You were going to let it go but since they saw fit to come after you for repairing your own property, you feel it is only fitting that they should not only shoulder that cost as well as the cost of defending this frivilous threat of a lawsuit. The proof that they would need, is that the unlooper was used for illegal purposes. I can not see them being able to do so. Once you take the unlooper and read a card and save the image, then loop it and then unloop it and reset the original image back on to the card, would prove that it just reapaired a virgion card that was damaged. That would blow out their theory that unloopers have no other purpose then pirating cards, now, would it not?

As I said this is only an idea, and I do not see it as being flawed, but let your lawyer make those decisions for you. That is why you pay him

Zappa Crappa

January 3rd, 2002, 07:15 PM

They also partially describe the functionality of said unlooper

Did they include any tips on unlooping HU cards?

gunsmoke2

January 3rd, 2002, 07:25 PM

My comment is to follow the advice of your lawyer. Vector it seems has fully co-operated with DTV.

GS2

Itchy

January 3rd, 2002, 07:29 PM

morgana you may want to read the back of your access card,

"This card is the property of NDS Ltd...."

Unfortunately it is their card and I don't know how well that argument will go over. I beleive they will have to provide proof you used the device illegally, say I but a great big ornamental water bong on my trip to Indonesia, just because I own one does not make me a user of illegal substances, correct. They would need to find an altered card from you to prove you were using it illegally, or perhaps you sent it to your friend in Canada, where unlooping cards is completely legal (at least for now it is).

As I mentioned on another post, I think they are trying to bully you into some settlement. Unfortunately they most likely have the means to fight this longer than you.

morgana

January 3rd, 2002, 08:49 PM

Itchy
I do not care what it says on the back of the cards. It is not NDS's property, it belongs to you. They sell you the card it is yours. They do not lease you the card. Recently governments have sold seized cards at auctions to the general public giving even more crdence to that fact. I believe that even DTV has been warned by lawyers from their side that this is now pretty much eveident. In my opinion that is why DTV has refrained from looping any more cards with ECMs. They are totally liable for any damage they do to your property. We all know thwy could have looped any of the cards with the recent ECMs but did not. Maybe you have another theory.

The last time DTv looped anycards in an ECM was March 21 2001. From that point on things have never been looped by them, only by well meaning people with loaders.

If cards seized by customs can be sold at auction, to the public, then how can NDS claim the cards as their own?

Itchy

January 3rd, 2002, 10:58 PM

morgana, I don't disagree with what you are saying and without reading the terms of service between a purchaser and a subscriber I would tend to lean towards your argument (assuming the plaintiff was inteding on subscribing or did subscribe). It would seem to me to be a very grey issue that could not be determined by our discussion. If push came to shove I really don't know how far DAVE would push it.

Let me ask you this, do you have a credit card? Who owns that. Both are used are used to purchase something, correct?

I think it is an argument that could be made from both sides of the table and obviously there is no clear determination. I am just suggesting until someone proves otherwise, they maintain the card is their legal property and there is most definately case law to back up their claim as there is proprietary information on that card that belongs to them. I am not intenting any flame by my previous comments only passing on my comments for discussion.

vivapaco

January 3rd, 2002, 11:13 PM

Just play stupid, say that someone said that a unlooper is what you need because your satellite lost signal, say that you didn't know how to even hook it up to the reciever. Then go on to say that you ended up having a friend come over and fix your problem by going on the roof or something. You can also say that you tried to return the unlooper because it didn't hook up to your reciever, but they never got back to you.

Playing stupid has always worked for me i have gotten out of tons of tickes and trouble.

morgana

January 4th, 2002, 07:52 AM

Itchy
Credit card companies do not sell you the credit cards. DTV sells you a card and if you happen to lose or need replacement again chrages you for the card. That means the are giving you ownership. If you were leasing the card they would have to have express agreements to this. I only mentioned the above defence as a possible way to make DTV have to quit claims sompletely, as if you can prove a legal use for an unlooper, all their claims otherwise fall short of the mark.

The card ownership issue, (again only my opinion) has already been addressed and NDS ownership has failed to meet the mark. As I have said earlier, I know for sure that governments have spld DTV access cards seized by customs at auctions to the public. If NDS ownership was truly the case, then both USA and Canadian governments have beem selling stolen goods, it is that simple. Also following these same lines, this would explain DTV's lack of doing any damage to the cards during all the recent ECM's. There may be other reasons for this but I am at a loss to see them as yet.

seymour_teevee

January 4th, 2002, 01:22 PM

What a crock!

1 CRAZY CANUCK

January 4th, 2002, 06:53 PM

Hey, seymour_teevee. What is your legal opinion on this issue?
Mine is that "No" the plastic card is not the property of NDS; but, that little secluded know-how in the GOLD chip is NDS's, by patent [pending] law and no doubt Worldwide "patent" owner[s]. And, all that tells me is that for the next [say] seven years; or, so; nobody can develop; or, copy a marketable simularity to NDS's patent.
If the plastic card is legally the property of NDS than if I was to destroy a card, deliberately, I can be charged with destroying private property. I know it states something to the effect that "this card is the property of NDS and must be returned upon request"which places this whole issue in a weird view. Like NDS requested my card back [but, they have no record on me holding card #112233445566 - type of thing]; and I claim no knowledge of a NDS card #112233445566, and, I truly don't. How can I return something I don't have? - eh!
And, furthermore, HOW is it possible for a Canadian Court to order the return of "bulk" cards to the person who had possession of them ; before the RCMPs scooped them up! I can not see a big deal made over that "so-called" NDS claim on the back of the plastic cards.
Possession is 9/10th.; Right!

phoztech

January 4th, 2002, 08:04 PM

this may sound ridiculous....
but so what if you bought an unlooper... so what if you even unlooped a DTV card... they have no proof that you unlooped a DTV card to obtain illegal access to their tv system. the most that they could do is charge you with destruction of their property by unlooping their card if by some miracle they could even prove that you did unloop a card. also I recognize that there is some debate over the ownership of the card itself (and frankly i think that NDS does retain ownership but i am no lawyer).

also there are other uses for unloopers...what if you have other smart cards and you being the bumbling idiot that you are software looped your personal computer security smartcard.... or heck you reprogram DTV access Cards and use them as computer security access cards... let me point out that on NDS's own website they say that there are multiple uses for smartcards(even there own smart cards)..
http://www.nds.com/solutions/home_network.html#
so send them a snapshot of there own website and see what they say.

the thing that they are going for is to scare people away from hacking the system... and even though they know that they can be beat in court they will still issue these lawsuits as a scare tactic , they have plenty of MONEY to waste, but is it really a waste what if spending 1 million a year on bogus lawsuits deters enough people from hacking to make the 2 million dollars then what do you know mission accomplished they made MONEY.. also they realize that most people dont have the time or the MONEY to go to court... and MONEY is what buys the justice system...ask yourself is OJ(had MONEY) free and has Microsoft(still has MONEY) actually broken up yet?

I believe taht TTRK has probably said it a thousand times ... "a invoice is proof of nothing" (paraphrased).... i will add to it that even though they may be able to prove through the credit card companies and paypal and fedex that you did buy an recieve such items they still have not proven that you actually used these items in an illegal manner.

anyway that is my two cents and random thoughts as they flow through my swiss cheese brain.

PhoZtech(No MONEY, except for the two cents mentioned above)

gunsmoke2

January 4th, 2002, 10:03 PM

What a crock!

Well seymour if you are refering to the comment about the Canadian Government selling NDS access cards please be advised its very real. The terms of the sale clearly states that the title belongs to the purchaser.

These are siezed goods by Canada customs that are turned over to the Government for sale. Perhaps NDS failed to notify the Canadian Government that it was their propery as you think but then again the Canadian Government instructed the RCMP to go on search and rescue missions and seize NDS cards.

ICC,

He doesn't give legal opinions but his role as a PR spokesperson you got to give him A+ for effort ;)

GS2

Sonic Cow

January 4th, 2002, 10:08 PM

they have no evidence that you have done anything wrong.
they are waiting for you to open your mouth and incriminate yourself....mums the word, make them make their own case, I`m sure an unlooper can be used for other purposes...a planter....a cat toy...etc

phoztech

January 4th, 2002, 10:25 PM

one other thing that i think does need to be asked and or mentioned ...
all that i have heard of is that DTV is sending out letters and that they are pursuing civil action and not criminal action ( please correct me if I am wrong).. .if this is the case then i beleive that DTV does not need to actally prove anything.. they just have to convince a judge that you damaged there company financially or that you acted with neglegence... I could be totally way off base but am interested to se what the rest of yall have to say....

LAter,
PhoZtech

EAO

January 4th, 2002, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by stranglehold
2nd inning.

Yarmuth and Co. faxed my lawyer a copy of what appears to be a screen print of Vecto's customer database and a copy of a Packing slip showing the purchase an Unlooper. They gave a few days to respond, or they will assume that we do not wish to settle. They also partially describe the functionality of said unlooper. Stating that the ONLY purpose for an unlooper is to allow the user to recieve illegal DIRECTV service.

This is not true. I am woking on a response - any comments are welcomed.

stranglehold from my reading civil actions don't require the same reasonable doubt as a criminal ction. but if the only physical evidence is an invoice,and a bunch of speculation and inuendo,do you really think someone is going to convict someone on theory and circumstantial evidence ??????

like i said before,there not taking anything to court. he has a lawyer and any lawyer that has any confidence in himself is going to tell them,I'LL SEE YOU IN COURT".,closed case,dropped suit,so they can continue to use intimidation without fear of a lawsuit for filing a malicious,lawsuit that has no possibility of succeding without someone confessing.

this was his first post and thread and has not posted since.
let's wait and see if he gives us an update.

EAO

January 4th, 2002, 11:28 PM

they don't tell you what to do,they only give you advice and even if something is a no brainer, 100%,is your favor,they'll alway's qualify that with you never know what a jury will do.

just because someone passea test doesn't mean there capable of stating a case coherently.

a good lawyer is a good salesman,he's got to have the qualities of being convincing and persuasive.

and with those same qualities he's going to convince you how tuff it is to convince a jury of the obvious to justify his fee.

stranglehold

January 5th, 2002, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by EAO

this was his first post and thread and has not posted since.
let's wait and see if he gives us an update.

I cannot deny or argue my post count here. I am very new here - via another site, GS2 told me about a post on this site related to my problem. So I signed up.

I read posts nearly every day - on several sites. I am not testing, just looking for information to exploit the false accusations that have been directed at me.

Thanks to all that post helpfull information.

Little P

January 5th, 2002, 08:13 AM

I bought an unlooper, but it was because my friend Ken Jones, who has since moved to somewhere in the southwestern US, didn't have a credit card, and he was concerned about sending cash or a money order for some electronic equipment, which he might never see again. He's an electronics guy, and I have no clue what he bought the stuff for. I got a box in the mail, and gave it to Ken-no clue what this "unlooper" thing was. I'm a paying customer of DTV, so why would I do something to a "card"? I don't even see a card anywhere, anyway. Some guy put up a dish and hooked up a receiver and I watch tv that I pay for, and that's what I see. That's what I know about all this stuff.

seymour_teevee

January 5th, 2002, 10:51 AM

Good one. Like the authorities and DirecTV never hear variations on that theme? You're dealing with a federal felony, not a "trivial" local misdemeanor. The authorities will give you every opportunity to provide them with verifiable information about the nefarious Mr. Jones with an offer of reduced or no prosecution. Otherwise, you're subject to taking the fall because you're at least considered an accessory after the fact. (District attorneys and federal prosecutors really don't care who takes the fall - they're mainly interested in obtaining convictions if it comes to a criminal case. Looks good on their resumes when they run or come up for county or federal judgeships.) 1st degree murder convictions with "special circumstances" in California - with all the strict interpretation of "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" which that entails - have been successfully brought in on nothing but circumstantial evidence. I'm not saying that DirecTV will push what begins as a civil suit to criminal status. But it would be dangerously naive to assume that it couldn't happen.

gunsmoke2

January 5th, 2002, 04:34 PM

You're dealing with a federal felony, not a "trivial" local misdemeanor. The authorities will give you every opportunity to provide them with verifiable information about the nefarious Mr. Jones with an offer of reduced or no prosecution. Otherwise, you're subject to taking the fall because you're at least considered an accessory after the fact. (District attorneys and federal prosecutors really don't care who takes the fall - they're mainly interested in obtaining convictions

Get real seymour we are talking about civil proceedings not criminal. No Federal prosecuters or District attorneys.. no prosecutions.. or accesorry.. or obtaining convictions.

Why do you spread so much bull----... you seem so adament in making sure that everyone is going to either lose all their property in one post to now saying that they are faced with federal felony charges and convictions.

You also imply it might come to criminal

if it comes to a criminal case

Why don't you just tell everyone they will lose all their property and go to jail for a minium of ten years and possibly face sparky the chair.

You gloat with enjoyment in creating unnecesarry fear.

You don't like Canadians and you posted that everyone should own one. ( I edited that one out )

You insisted that your favorite company - NDS could not lose the bid on DTV.. then when they did you come and say it was done on purpose so your favorite company ( NDS ) could buy it for less when Charlie didn't pass anti trust laws.

There is no need to express your fairy tales here.

GS2

1 CRAZY CANUCK

January 5th, 2002, 06:06 PM

GS2 is right! "seymour teevee". You did state: " you really had nothing aganst Canadians. Everyone should own one!"You had address that to me regarding my "username" - eh!.
I gotta hand it to you though. You're Good! Real Good! At spreading it "THICK"!!!

EAO

January 5th, 2002, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by stranglehold

I cannot deny or argue my post count here. I am very new here - via another site, GS2 told me about a post on this site related to my problem. So I signed up.

I read posts nearly every day - on several sites. I am not testing, just looking for information to exploit the false accusations that have been directed at me.

Thanks to all that post helpfull information.

POST COUNT MEANS NOTHING,THE DATE YOU JOINED MEANS NOTHING. I WAS JUST SAYING LETS WAIT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS SINCE YOU HAD A LAWYER HANDLING THE Matter.

i didn't accuse you of anything and apologize that you perceieved my comments as a criticism.
my feelings are your lawyr is going to say the same things you see mentioned here,that an invoice means nothing wether it's verifiable or not.lets just say that it is illegal to posses an ulooper.
WELL HOW DO THEY PROVE YOU EVER POSSED IT WITH JUST AN INVOICE. they can't,they need you to admit it or have confiscated it thru a search warrant.

i guess if it's not a criminal action they can't get a search warrant.

the burden of proof in a civil action is considerably less than a criminal one. they would have to convince a jury/people that you not only possed the unlooper but that you used it to get unauthorized access to there signal.

the only way they could do that is if they had someone who would testify they saw you with it and they saw you use it in the unlooper,saw you place the card in the ird and saw that it operated and was able to view programming he knew you didn't pay for.

then it would still be your word against his,since they don't have the unlooper or a modified card from you.

actually,let me take a step back. i believe they only mention an invoice related to an unlooper. how much more is in the letter?

is it there premise that the mere possession of an unlooper demonstrates theft of signal from them ?
they know there are other uses and applications it can be used for.
that's why they aren't pursuing it criminally. and that's why it's all about getting admissions or default judgements.
they can write a letter and say anything they want. but if they file a suit knowing that they can't prove what they are claiming and there only intention is to get default judgements,that's grounds for a countersuit that there action/s are malicious and frivilous .

they know an invoice doesn't prove anything
they know there are other uses for an unlooper.
they know possesion of an unlooper is not illegal.

this is purely a tactic meant to stop/discourage others from entering or continuing to participate in gaining unautorized access to there signal.by doing this with the knowledge stated above, there clearly and illegally using the civil legal system and causing economic and mental anguish to people .

we don't have many verifiable facts as to what has happened when a lawyer is used to answer there letters ot lawsuits from start to finish.
but i'd say the matter is dropped without any admissions or deals when a lawyer is involved in response to the letter or a lawsuit.

they'll continue there tactic until someone sues them for the harrasment and the economic and mental anguish caused by a groundless letter and/or lawsuit.

the letter causes uneccessary legal cost and time for people to answer/defend.

there very confidant/cocky that will never happen.

gunsmoke2

January 5th, 2002, 08:26 PM

Hi stranglehold,

I did not recgonize your nick. I hope you enjoy this site as it is quite active on legal rights.

They gave a few days to respond, or they will assume that we do not wish to settle.

This I believe is the second one that I notice they want the defendent to settle. My guess is they prefer to have as many settle as possible versus going to court. If they wanted to go to court they wouldn't be saying in typical lawyer words " we will assume that you do not wish to settle if we don't hear from you in a few days "

One of the problems I see for them is establishing that you caused damages to them.. irrepitle damages.. that's the basis for a lawsuit. DTV being such a huge Corporation that I can't see how a so called purchase of an unlooper caused them any damages. Have you discussed this with your lawyer ? and how could DTV satisfy the court that they suffered damages as a result.

I believe some of the DSS hardware being your system is actually revenue for them.. certainly Hughes DSS is.

This reminds me of ExpressPuke in Canada who simply filled bully lawsuits with no intentions of collecting damages but merely hoping to put you out of buisness. You are not buisnesses but the idea is to get you to stop with an agreement never to do it again.. hope you turned into a paying customer.

If you settle make sure to tell them you will signed up with Echostar or cable.

GS2

To The Real King!!

January 5th, 2002, 10:29 PM

Originally posted by seymour_teevee
Good one. Like the authorities and DirecTV never hear variations on that theme? You're dealing with a federal felony, not a "trivial" local misdemeanor. The authorities will give you every opportunity to provide them with verifiable information about the nefarious Mr. Jones with an offer of reduced or no prosecution. Otherwise, you're subject to taking the fall because you're at least considered an accessory after the fact. (District attorneys and federal prosecutors really don't care who takes the fall - they're mainly interested in obtaining convictions if it comes to a criminal case. Looks good on their resumes when they run or come up for county or federal judgeships.) 1st degree murder convictions with "special circumstances" in California - with all the strict interpretation of "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" which that entails - have been successfully brought in on nothing but circumstantial evidence. I'm not saying that DirecTV will push what begins as a civil suit to criminal status. But it would be dangerously naive to assume that it couldn't happen.

Seymour what the hell do District attorneys and federal prosecutors have to do with a threatened private civil suit between DIRECTV and a citizen. You know that's total BULL. This is about DirecTV®' s threatened lawsuits, not some federal crime. What was suggested above is completely plausible and THEY have to provide the proof. You don't have to prove you are not guilty but the explanation above goes a long way towards your credibility when they cannot prove a thing.

Don't be telling people kaka. This is discussing CIVIL SUITS.

Furthermore I know a friend in the States who purchases cards at garage sales and flea markets. Many of them are looped and most have some type of programming on them. He uses the Unlooper to return these to stock and he sells them for multiples of what he paid for them. Does NOT even own a DirecTV® system as he could care less about TV. But he made a bundle for the last 3 or 4 years doing this which is a PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE enterprise. As you may know Americans are quite enterprising and often know how to turn a buck. No court would convict him for buying this Unlooper as this is a perfectly lawful use of it.

The LIE here is DirecTV® 's B U L L S H I T about its ONLY use being illegal. That is the lie to this, not the MANY legitimate uses for this among which is programming any ISO 7816 card depending on how the unit is flashed.

No, they better get MUCH improved "evidence" rather than just an invoice which proves diddly squat. Make no mistake they KNOW this too and are just using commercial and financial TERRORISM on people. Personally I think its time they got their comeuppance and I believe they will. Not everyone is a "milk a toast" shrinking violet and someone will have the balls to challenge them and make them look like the idiots they are in using the court system for frivolous reasons. Judge Real has already found this in the California courts. These are obviously no "rocket Scientists"http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!

Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

homesli

January 5th, 2002, 11:23 PM

Yet another great post by TTRK!. Like he said, What does an unlooper have to do with SIGNAL THEFT? You bought the DTV system right? Well then as a consumer you certainly have a right to protect your investment. What if your card is damaged by a storm or power spike (it has happened)? I think you should have the right to fix your card back to working order. And if the card is NDS' property, why is it your problem when it is damaged? Why do you have to foot the bill for the new card?

Stranglehold, as for preparing a return statement; I wouldn't even let those bastards know what I'm going to say next. Like someone said earlier, say "See you in court" then drop the bomb on them there. They don't have a chance.

-- homesli

proton-1

January 6th, 2002, 09:53 PM

Just a thought..

What we need is a script that runs in Winexplorer with an appropriate Atmel flash that would both "Loop & Unloop" a generic white smartcard.
Once demonstrated to a Judge/Jury, there would be no question as to the legal issue of purchasing or possessing an unlooper.

Only those caught reprogramming DTV smartcards would have to worry about their actions.

JUST A THOUGHT !

:cool:

To The Real King!!

January 7th, 2002, 01:30 AM

Hi proton-1

In general judges wont let you put on a demonstration in a courtroom. That's Perry Mason stuff :)

How this is done is by hiring a smart card expert (usually a University professor who teaches programming) and show him how a garage sale non working (looped) DirecTV® smart card is repaired back to normal using an Unlooper. He generally wont charge much if you don't have much money.

A file to LOOP a card is easy enough to make and you could show him a brand new card, loop it with the file (to show him what DirecTV® do) and then unloop it and return it to its original condition. Then let him do it himself. He will be able to explain this with authority in court, since he has done it from personal experience.

If these cards are purchased at garage sales or flea markets (I have bought many this way, with and without receivers for as little as $25.00 bucks) and they are repaired and resold for a good profit on eBay or at other garage sales or flea markets then you are home on a bicycle. How the other person uses it is not your business so long as its stock when you sell it. If they tell DirecTV® they bought it at a garage sale they can return the H-Card and DirecTV® will send them a HU Crd for their subscription.

The important thing is to show the judge that you purchased it for this or other LEGAL USES, if you did. There are a thousand legal uses and I bought one last year and brought it to my friend Larry in the Bahamas when I vacationed there last year. That's just one more legal reason for buying one if I were American. Larry cannot use it illegally in the Bahamas.

Its a little like a HAMMER. That is 100% legal to drive nails but its a WEAPON if you use it to bonk someone on the head and illegal at that point. An Unlooper that is NOT used for illegal purpose CANNOT BE ILLEGAL since it has many legitimate uses no matter what BS DirecTV® say. Progrsamming ISO-7816 smart cards is just ONE of them. After all its not a million dollar product as is cheaper than many programmers made by gemPlus and other vendors.

You have the expert program a card that he uses too so that you show that even HE can use it for legal purpose. Once he is qualified as an EXPERT the rules are that what HE SAYS MUST be believed by the judge unless disproved by DTV's expert. How could they possibly do that. The judge does NOT have the right to disbelieve him and your expert will not and does not need to lie. He can show several legal reasons to own the product.

That is the way it works in a court room and if you don't like the first expert you talk to then you get another one. DirecTV® CANNOT say that what your expert says is untrue so the judge will accept it as being true. With an invoice they have NO PROOF that you used it illegally at all so all they can do is INFER that it COULD have been used illegally. So can my 45 if I use it to shoot someone but its licensed and perfectly legal otherwise and they would have to PROVE that I shot someone, not infer it. This is no different in principle.

Hi homesli,

Certainly in Canada we have proved that these cards are NOT the property of NDS and in most jurisdictions what you purchase and get a receipt for (a satellite receiver, dish, remote and Card) is the property of the purchaser. The BOX and the INVOICE do NOT tell you that you are buying some property that remains someone elses. Normally they have to take a "LIEN" on property (like a house under construction) to continue to own it when you purchase it. Normally once paid in full, the property reverts to the buyer.

That will depend on PROPERTY LAWS in each state but I doubt that any state would not decide that the BUYER of property is the owner no matter what they print on the card.

When you buy Microsoft Windows you are NOT free to sell copies but you certainly can sell the original and cease using it or write new data on the diskettes after you upgrade to Unix or whenever. Its the WINDOWS that may not be sold by itself except the original (if you cease using it), not the diskettes themselves (the media) which DOES belong to you. Besides that is in a shrink-wrap agreement and there is none with a RCA receiver set.

People, an invoice does NOT constitute illegal use of an unlooper or programmer in any way, shape or form but you need to defend it if they bring suit. Any well prepared case will be won against them when that is their evidence.

If however they come to your home and seize an illegal Access Card then that fact will also make the Unlooper or programmer illegal. It will be presumed to have been used in the commission of that crime since you own BOTHhttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!

Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

phoztech

January 7th, 2002, 10:22 AM

well first of all this has been a pretty good thread to read...

I would like some follow up thoughts on something:
TTRK you said "If however they come to your home and seize an illegal Access Card then that fact will also make the Unlooper or programmer illegal. It will be presumed to have been used in the commission of that crime since you own BOTH"

my question or statement is:
at what point do they have the right to come into my home.. aka howeasy is it to obtain a search warrant ,, is all they have to do is go to the judge with a invoice that says that i bought an unlooper and the judge will grant the search warrant? what are yalls thoughts on this... and
can you come back and say that this search warrant was not valid and thus the fruits of this invalid search warrant should be thrown out due to the fact that purchasing an unlooper is not illegal and the only reason that DTV/Feds got the search warrant was cause they said its only use was illegal actvity?

what are your options if they do get a search warrant and they do find a emu system in someones house? should you just fold and cooperate pay the fines etc?

one other thing is i realize that it is or should be very difficult for the government to come into my home,, however i am assuming that it is much easier for the government to go into a business and thus this is why you see businesses getting raided and not peoples homes.
the exception being OJ but that was really a drug issue...

Later,
PhoZtech

Hi phoztech,

In order to do a search and Seizure they would normally need "probably cause" which an invoice alone is unlikely to provide. But if they somehow tied that up with a delivery slip and a credit card slip, who is to say what some dumb "justice of the peace" would do. Seizures are obtained from the lowest level of courts there are so ONCE the letter is received its best to assume the worst. Lets say that for instance you have some "illegal booze" in the house that your uncle made. The best thing to do if you get the letter is to GET RID of that booze and get it OUT of the house.

You wouldn't want a problem for ANY small thing like that.

Chances are NOT something you should take once you have a letter telling you that SOMETHING is up.

Better safe than sorry is what I am saying :)

As to if the seizure is illegal, that may well be so but why have the illegal booze around for anyone to find. Do a housecleaning until the whole deal is over because that could be embarrassing :)

See what I mean. This goes for anyone who gets the letter and its like a smoke alarm. You hope you never need it but its best to be safe. Once they come (if they do) things can get complicated no matter what rights are broken. An example is when they raided me they took all my guns to make me look bad. I recently signed a deal to get them back and they were not interested in them but the idea was to make me look bad.

Take no chances AT ALL is always the best advice.

Hope this helps,

To The REAL King!!

proton-1

January 7th, 2002, 01:30 PM

TTRK

very good points indeed, but let's say you bought at a garage sale, a card that does not have it's original Cam ID, say it's "Cloned".

How would you bring it back to "Stock/Original" condition without the original Cam Id? You obviously couldn't!

Also, doesn't the current software available leave the card at a USW other than "0".

Wouldn't it be an easier fight to prove that the unlooper is not for a specific type of card but for many types of "Generic" cards by having the "Expert Witness" loop and unloop several different types of Generic cards instead, and testify to that fact?

This would, in my opinion,most definitley throw a wrench in DTV's claim that it's primary use is for signal theft?

What do you think?

:cool:

Hi proton-1,

Buying a cheap unlooper does NOT make you an expert and/or maybe your not the nicest guy. But when you unloop em, they buy em and at a big profit to you. So you don't need to be a rocket scientist, just make em to play on channel 100 and they walk out sold :)

How would YOU know about fancy dancy durn things like original CAM ID and Zero Knowledge Tables and stuff. Shucks you just want to sell em, not romance em. You are NOT a rocket scientist here, just a guy who buys and sells at garage sales and enjoys it and even makes a few bucks doing it. It even makes enough to let ya take the wife out to Dennys for a splurge dinner now and then. Lets dont get carried away here
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif

There are as many scenarios and legal uses as there are members here and its just a matter of stating the LEGAL USAGE that YOU (or whomever gets the letter ) put the thing to. Its not like there is only one legal usage. Probably 50 times more legal uses than the one illegal one of using it to program a device to steal TV. Its REAL hard to do that if you don't even have a dish.

Thanks

To The REAL King!!

mordeci00

January 7th, 2002, 04:08 PM

so the question remains, although answered by ommission, has anyone experienced anything more than a letter? a court date? a search warrant? a team of armed stormtroopers carrying shields with dave's logo marching towards your house?

1 CRAZY CANUCK

January 7th, 2002, 04:18 PM

Purely "SPECULATION" - eh!
Come on Guys! There is a multitude of "What ifs??" I think the point has been over-reviewed by now!
The RCMPs just came to my door today with a warrant looking for the Beretta 9mm with the hundred rounds, they had an "invoice" showing that the "said items" where sent to me. They searched and found NOT! O'wait! They're charging me with possession of a handgun with ammo. They say they have a receipt with my "John Hancock", on it! GREAT!
However, the date of signature [forgery]; does not coincide with my presences."
So, now I have to hire a lawyer to prove my innocences![Can't afford one?.. Get Legal-Aid!]
What "bulls***t"! - eh!
Come on! No Judge is going to allow a "Search and Seizure" warrant without stronger evidence than a "piece of paper" with my name on it!
Secondly, if I smell "smokies", I'd be pulling my H-card [in the U.S.A., only.. -eh!]
My point is; can't afford lawyer, go to a Legal Aids Service; and stop the SWEAT!:D

WINTER

January 7th, 2002, 04:25 PM

I am not a legal expert but I do care to comment on the card being property of News Datacom (NDS).

I got a DTV receiver from my mother-in-law a couple of years ago. I called up to have it activated and DTV said that I could not activate the system as it was, since the access card was not transferable, but they would be happy to ship me a new access card for $70.00.

Well I said if that is what it is then ship me the new card and I will pay the $70.00.

Well I received the new card, which they activated for me and paid the $70.00 for it, which appeared on my monthly statement.

If the card is property of "NDS" why did I pay $70.00 for it? I did not sign a rental contract nor was informed that even if I paid the money the card really wasn't mine. For all intents and purposes I was led to believe that the $70.00 was to PURCHASE the DTV access card.

The printing on the card that says "property of NDS" is a crock of
sh!t, as I have documentation to prove that I purchased the card complete with receipt of payment.

bigcountry

January 7th, 2002, 04:50 PM

I asked this in an other thread: TTRK and those who say fight this how much do you think the average cost is to get an attonery and an expert witness to fight this? People need to know what they are getting into before they chose to fight this? Please get A $ amount not alot, or not much.

Hi Bigcountry,

Its not quite that simple. People who made deals usually had to take a full sub and pay them a couple of thousand as can be seen here:

http://www.legal-rights.org/docketaug.html

Read the damn things and you will see what p r i c k s they are.

BUT they pre sign you up, as part of the deal, to pay them between $100,000.00 and $200,000.00 if they EVER catch you in the future. That is part of the deal. Its a PRE-AGREED JUDGEMENT for the future. Look at 301 for $447,500 or 311 for $145,000.00 for example. Those are PRE agreed entitlements for PERMANENT injunctions. Anyone who signs that is as crazy as a coot.

So you probably wont save any money (depends on your lawyer) but once you get one the chances of them going through with it are much lower. If they KNOWE you are well defended they will be much more reticent to actually go to court with it.

Once these B A S T A R D S get any admission they will hound you to the DEATH. As I have said many times, these are NOT fine folks but rather the dirtiest ****ers you can imagine or WORSE.

So its not just a matter of a few bucks more or less this way or that. They want your ass in a NOOSE.

Thanks

To The REAL King!!

EAO

January 7th, 2002, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by frankiefrog
it would seem that a judge is gonna need more than a "invoice" to issue a search warrant JMO especially a invoice of a legal product
and if it was "easy" we would probably be hearing more on it
now the few that did get raided there was probably just cause
like advertising,survailance of the property with alot of traffic etc

I AGREE WITH THAT AND SIMILAR COMMENTS BY phoztech, THAT'S MY THINKING.

in order to issue a search warrant reasonable evidence that a crime has been commited must be presented to a judge.
a civil action doesn't require proof of anything to file.

that sort of say's it all.

they don't have anything that would convince a judge to issue a warrant for physical evidence to support there aseretion that the invoice constitutes evidence that an unlooper if it is found would prove that someone used it to steal there sat signal because the judges are aware that the unlooper can be used for many other legal purposes.

who owns the cards is not something dt- wants to get into there's penty of case law on that issue that goes against them. the fact someone expresses certain rights or warranties on goods does not make it so.
most warranties and statements trat are done properly and legally always have a statement that say's that they may not be allowed in certain jurisdictions.

as i've said before there are legal service plans that run from 9-15 p/mos that give you unlimited consultations on seperate issues and have a set rate that is much lower than the usual charges to retain someone.

200 p/hr is was the fee in the plan i had. i'm not sure how much of a deposit/retainer is required,but that usually depends on the lawyers estimate of the time it will take to resolve the matter.

it appears they don't have anthing , a motion to dismiss must be prepared by your lawyer and submitted. i don't know wether you have to
go to court 1st to do that or not.

if most of whats been said here is accurate legally the suit would be dismissed and you would more than likely be awarded legal and court cost.

imo,there not going this far,if an attorney gets involved on your behalf with a call or letter that says you haven't done anything illegal and will see them in court if they file a suit.

it's a bluff to scare/discourage and stop people from participating in this activity. and this type of dialog for people looking in here is advertising and publicity that demonstrates they are pursuing legal remedies if they have anything with your name on it that could be used to give unauthorized access.

there are many people that will decide they don't want any entanglement regadless if it's baseless.

maybe there are other reasons but without being on there legal team we'll never know.

Little P

January 8th, 2002, 03:17 AM

Winter-you are so right. What a crock! What if I buy a car for $20,000, and there is some fine print under the front seat that says that the car is the property of "Johnny's Auto Sales", and that if Johnny feels like it, and if I don't use it in accordance with Johnny's specifications, he can reclaim it. Does that mean that after I pay for it, take it home and drive it for 3 years that Johnny can come by the house and tell me to hand over the keys because he stamped some wording on it? I think not!!! I paid for the system, and there was a card in the receiver. I didn't sign anything when I bought the system, so good luck to NDS or whoever to try to claim that MY property is theirs. I'm not a legal expert in this field, but I have been a practicing attorney for a long time, and I'd love to see them convince a judge otherwise.

gunsmoke2

January 8th, 2002, 11:22 AM

I have found keys that say this is the property of the Holiday Inn and please return them. There was no purchase or agreement as it means really would you be kind enough to return they key to the Holiday Inn.

GS2

BubbaHill

January 9th, 2002, 06:57 PM

Do A search on " Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This will give some good info. This was signed by President Clinton on Oct. 28, 1998, and was not effective until Oct.28, 2000. This may be a loop hole for many. See section 1203: Civil Remedies.. The $10,000 fine is Bull! :)

Just The Facts

January 14th, 2002, 07:07 AM

The individual owns the card. Period, End of story

NDS would have to get you to sign a conditional sales contract at the time of sale to legally retain ownership, They do not so it is yours.

This print it on the card and then sell it to you is a JOKE.

I guess Maytag should just print on every Washing machine "Property of Maytag".

Or GM can put a label on a new car "this automobile remains the property of GM"and it is theirs forever.

Come on why wouldn't every manufacturer just print that on their stuff and you never own anything.

ANY COURT will laugh NDS and Direct right out of court with the, its printed on the card so it is ours forever argument.

That argument is just LAME LAME LAME LAME LAME.

1 CRAZY CANUCK

January 14th, 2002, 08:43 AM

Got to agree with you, Just the Facts!
For starters, How can they determine "WHO" has which CARD. The way, they dumped those cards, all over Canada. Man! Guys at one time were buying them a "tray" at a time. I was buying four to six H cards, at a time from a reputable business, in the States. And, even DirecTv packages; as well as; DishNet.
The "crack-down" began when DAVE ordered all borderline US retailers to stop selling to Canadians. But, Canadian Customs still a reasonable amount come into Canada; as long as you paid the "duty" and, whatever "tax".
One should take into account maybe that's acceptable in U.S. Court; but, I can't see OUR Courts upholding to that claim.
Has anyone heard from TTRK, lately? He seems to be pretty quiet, on the site. If you hear from TTRK; kindly mention Crazy was wondering about him. Thanks!
:D :D :D

BubbaHill

January 14th, 2002, 06:58 PM

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Effective date Oct. 28,2000. Civil Remedies: ( A ) Civil Actions - Any person injured by a violation of section 1201 or 1202 may bring a civil action in an appropriate United States District court for such violation.
Section 1203 (2) At any time an action is pending, may order the impounding, on such terms as it deems reasonable, of any device or product that is in the custody or control of the alleged violator and that the court has reasonable cause to believe was involved in a violation:
My Friend's, these are very strong word's. I don't know how far DTV will go. I think, if they wanted to get a search warrant, it may be possible. I still don't think they will try all of this on the end user's. The cost would be to much. I personally took all my toy's to a new location, until this blow's over. Yes, call me Gut-less, but best safe, than sorry. This is only a hobby for me, and to much hashing going on right now to keep up with. TV is not the most important thing in my life. Hell, next week my Doctor could tell me I have Cancer, and 6 month's to live. I will be back! :) :)

To The Real King!!

January 15th, 2002, 06:39 AM

Hi Folks,

Property laws vary by jurisdiction. In Quebec where I live NDS would have to file a lien with the court if they sell something and wish to retain possession of the property. It can technically be done but you would have to agree to a lien on the property and that has to be filed with a court PRIOR to the transfer of their property to your possession for a consideration.

This is commonly done with building materials until such time as you prove that the workers who installed the materials have been paid in full since they could take a lien on the property that you will paid for (normal 30 day terms) if they were not paid in full. The supplier could find the property seized by a third party who could keep it even though you have not paid for it.

But since NDS filed no such lien and transferred the property to you or some other distributor whom you purchased it from, the property belongs to YOU and they can whistle Dixie.

So while the law varies from place to place the result is almost always the same. You bought it and paid for it. ITS YOURS.

The real purpose of them placing those words on the cards is to provide "prime facie" evidence (first blush proof) to a court that the property is theirs. Once they provide that proof you can be arrested and the property seized but then if you can prove that YOU purchased it properly that prime facie evidence becomes worthless. But in the meantime they have put you into a position of litigation and forced you to make the legal proof all the while that the goods are seized and they will try to delay that for as long as possible. Its another way that they improperly USE the legal system to harm you by asserting rights they really do not have. But all this has to be proven before a tribunal where its a costly battle.

What is not evident is that these goods are "perishable" and may become valueless if they manage to stall long enough and NDS may become subject to large civil responsibility if you can prove the loss. For instance H-Cards that were once available for $50.00 each are worth how much on the open market today?
If they are worth say $300.00 on the open market and you can provide proper proof of that then their liability may be $250.00 per card if they go valueless by the time they are returned. This will depend entirely on how long they are able to fight the battle to keep them.

If the cards owners can prove this in court NDS may be subject to large civil losses that were incurred by the real owner. But of course going to court is always in their favor since its costly and many people cannot afford to finance the costs over the several layers of appeal that they may go through. And in the end those costs are trivial for a multi billion dollar corporation like NDS but may not be so trivial for a small businessman.

That is the edge they count on.

But sometimes they make a mistakehttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!

Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

Evildss

January 15th, 2002, 10:09 AM

azjoe

January 15th, 2002, 10:23 AM

Well, I'm certainly no lawyer, so I don't know who legally owns the card... but I do know that I received a new "Customer Agreement" with my DTV bill last month. I suspect very few customers have actually read it. IMO, it is almost completely one-sided in favor of DTV... including the fact that they have the right to change the terms at any time and that if I do not accept the new terms they will immediately cancel my service and charge me a "deactivation" fee. It includes the following statements which gave me considerable pause for thought...

"This document describes the terms and conditions regarding your receipt and payment of DirecTV service (as described in Section 1, below). If you do not accept these terms, please notify us immediately and we will cancel your service. If you instead decide to receive our service, it will mean that you accept these terms and, accordingly, they will be legally binding on you. ..."

Section 1.e:
"... Access Cards are nontransferable and will at all times remain the exclusive property of DirecTV. ..."

I sometimes wish I had the balls to run my business that way... where I'm always right and the customer is a total victim of my whims. Then again, by not doing it their way... by remembering that I must compete for a customer's business, I haven't had to look for someone to buy out an economically flailing corporation. Hmmmm... I wonder what Charlie's agreement will say?

phoztech

January 15th, 2002, 01:24 PM

"... Access Cards are nontransferable and will at all times remain the exclusive property of DirecTV. ..."

so are we selling the cards back to dtv?
hmmm ... it seems that if i bought the card and took ownership then how can they come in after the fact and take it away from me ...

example would be I go and buy a Car and 2 year warranty for $50,000 at the independant Chevy delearship pay cash and walk away... 2 months later i get a letter from GM stating that if i want the warranty to remain valid that the car now belongs to them... how does this make sense?

some thing smells on this one...

I can say that i have seen the agreements that people sign in stores and it does state that the cards are the property of DTV..

Also I cant wait till i fly home to see this letter/last months bill...

To The Real King!!

January 15th, 2002, 03:36 PM

Hi azjoe,

Now things are starting to get REALLY interesting. Is it possible for you to fax me a copy of that letter to the Legal-Rights.org fax at 450-451-6477.

The reason I am so interested is that we NOW have a real conflict and it would seem that there is now added confusion as to who owns the card (which you do naturally).

But now we have NDS (News Datacom Americas) printing on the card that they belong to them and DirecTV® now claiming that the card at all times belongs to THEM. So even between these two there is contention as to who owns the cards and it SURE AS HELL cannot be both of them. As you paid for them when you acquired them can you IMAGINE just how puzzled a Judge would be about this discrepancy and confusion among two companies, NDS who made the cards and DirecTV® who purchased them from NDS and then sold them to RCA, Hughes, Sony etc., who then SOLD them to you. And they are BOTH trying to defraud YOU out of them. Pretty nasty stuff I would say.

I believe that this confusion would even make it clearer that they do not know who among them owns the cards because NEITHER of them does. When I go to court and NDS claims ownership, I want to show this letter to the Judge saying that DirecTV® claim to own them so HOW could NDS possibly own them when they made them for and sold them to DirecTV®. As DirecTV® have not tried to claim any rights in my case, their letter proves that they DO NOT belong to NDS and since DirecTV® don't claim them and as I bought them from their (DTV"S dealers), they must be mine as I hold the bill showing ownership and I possess them too. This will go for many defendants in Canada, many of whom NDS have already given up assertion to ownership for the cards further proving they are NOT theirs.

This just goes to show how screwed up they are with everyone claiming ownership of something that can belong to only ONE person, he who bought and possess them.

I would say that the others are trying to DEFRAUD us for the cards and may be subject to criminal charges for the attempted FRAUD. What else can it be called when you assert ownership to something that is NOT yours.

Please fax me a copy of the letter and simply white out your name if it appears on the letter.

Talk about screwed uphttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!

Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!