To The Real King!!
September 16th, 2002, 08:57 PM
The article is called:
Avoiding the Pitfalls of Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
And you can see it posted on legal rights.org at:
http://www.legal-rights.org/dtv/maliciousprosecution.html
And there is also a link there to the original web page. This is perfect information for all those who feel that these threats go too far and they give you an interesting remedy that you can run by your lawyer.. With this information there is really no reason for people to feel helpless since there is an available remedy.
Hope this helps peoplehttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
Its interesting that the document states "This is particularly true where malicious prosecution liability may result where a single theory is pursued without probable cause, even if the remainder of the lawsuit is meritorious and successful. (See Crowley v. Kattleman 8 Cal.4th 666 (1994)). "I think many will find this more than interesting if they read the document carefully.
Note that one paragraph states "A red flag should always go up where the client appears to be primarily motivated by revenge, particularly if there already exists a history of disputes and litigation. Again, these situations have built-in malice. The client may also tend to allow personal feelings to cause him or her to exaggerate or embellish supporting facts, and to exert pressure to pursue questionable claims. " and that there are statements from DirecTV™ reps that seem to imply this.Here is one of them by Mr. Mercer. Seems it may have a little revenge in it and there are others on their site and in the media too that may prove this. When a lawsuit gets published by he who takes the lawsuit one could see that the reason is revenge and malicious since nothig has been proved yet. Like harm their reputation BEFORE it gets to a court to decide. That sounds a bit malicious to me but I am not a lawyer. Run it by yours in case it has merit.
FEDERAL COURT
DirecTV suing 7 over stolen services
SCRANTON - Taking the offensive against viewers it alleges are stealing its satellite signal, DirecTV, Inc. has filed a federal lawsuit that seeks tens of thousands of dollars in damages from seven residents in six area counties, including one each from Luzerne and Lackawanna.
The suit is among at least 250 suits filed nationwide in a crackdown the company hopes will halt the interception of its signals, which is a violation of several federal laws, spokesman Robert Mercer said Friday.
The company previously targeted only suppliers of devices that allow its signals to be intercepted, but it recently turned its focus to the purchasers of the devices, known as end-users.
"We're sending a very clear message to consumers: You cannot steal our signal with impunity," Mercer said. "There are people who wouldn't dream of stealing an apple off a fruit stand, yet they think nothing of stealing a satellite TV signal. ... It's stealing - no different than hot wiring a Honda or walking into a local drug store and shoplifting."
DirecTV is the nation's largest satellite programming provider with 10.5 million subscribers. Its signal is beamed to a satellite dish installed in a home, which then sends the signal through a receiver that "descrambles" it so the programs can be viewed.
The descrambling is achieved through an access card the size of a credit card that is inserted into the satellite receiver. Customers pay a monthly fee based on the number of channels they wish to view.
The problem is with pirated access cards and other devices that allow users to descramble the DirecTV signal without paying the company for it. The pirate cards, which usually sell for $200 to $300, typically last a few months - until the company sends an electronic signal through its satellite that short-circuits them, Mercer said.
The cards work only with legitimate DirecTV satellite receivers. Mercer said a typical signal theft case involves a person who purchases a low-end programing package, then obtains a pirate card to allow them to get all programming.
Mercer said it's difficult to calculate how much revenue the company loses each year because it doesn't know how many pirated cards are in use. But the firm estimates a pirated card can steal programming valued at up to $100,000 a year._ (obviously crap by what he says above, ME).
The local suit, filed May 29 in the U.S. District Court of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in Scranton, targets seven people the company identified through billing records obtained through a search warrant served last year on one of the major distributors of pirated access cards, Vector Technologies of Kentucky.
Among the defendants is Mark Murgallis of Wyoming Street, Ashley, who is accused of obtaining supplies that would allow him to reprogram a legitimate DirecTV card so that it could receive additional programing for which he did not pay.
Murgallis did not immediately return a phone message left with his wife Friday afternoon.
Mercer said DirecTV sent letters to all people identified through the Vector Technologies case, offering them the chance to avoid liability if they sent in their pirated devices. The company filed suit only against those who did not reply to the letter or refused to comply with its demands, he said. He did not know how many letters were sent.
The other defendants named in the local suit are: Jason Miller of Dover; John Troup III of Harrisburg; Michael Calabrese of Mechanicsburg; Matt Griggs of Dalton; Jennifer Hecker of Port Matilda and Wayne Nocton of Waynesboro.
The suit seeks hefty damages ranging from $10,000-$100,000 for each violation of federal law. Mercer said the company "is very serious" about seeking recovery of those sums.
"We've invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the system, the satellites and the programming. ... This stuff is not just put out there for free."
End-users could be charged criminally, but typically criminal cases have been pursued only against distributors and manufacturers of the pirate cards, Mercer said.
Mercer said he hopes media coverage of the company's aggressive stance against end-users will help get the message across of how serious the situation is.
"If we can educate consumers -and it's a tough way to educate them - that stealing satellite signals is against federal law and they can get in a lot of trouble for it, maybe we can make some headway."
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkblack.gif
Thanks & Good Luck,
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/rotate_rib.gif
To The REAL King!!
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/satelliterights.gif
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/freedomblack.gif
Our Deepest Condolences one year later too (http://www.legal-rights.org/condolences.html) <-- Click here Please
Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT CENSORSHIP 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!
Avoiding the Pitfalls of Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
And you can see it posted on legal rights.org at:
http://www.legal-rights.org/dtv/maliciousprosecution.html
And there is also a link there to the original web page. This is perfect information for all those who feel that these threats go too far and they give you an interesting remedy that you can run by your lawyer.. With this information there is really no reason for people to feel helpless since there is an available remedy.
Hope this helps peoplehttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
Its interesting that the document states "This is particularly true where malicious prosecution liability may result where a single theory is pursued without probable cause, even if the remainder of the lawsuit is meritorious and successful. (See Crowley v. Kattleman 8 Cal.4th 666 (1994)). "I think many will find this more than interesting if they read the document carefully.
Note that one paragraph states "A red flag should always go up where the client appears to be primarily motivated by revenge, particularly if there already exists a history of disputes and litigation. Again, these situations have built-in malice. The client may also tend to allow personal feelings to cause him or her to exaggerate or embellish supporting facts, and to exert pressure to pursue questionable claims. " and that there are statements from DirecTV™ reps that seem to imply this.Here is one of them by Mr. Mercer. Seems it may have a little revenge in it and there are others on their site and in the media too that may prove this. When a lawsuit gets published by he who takes the lawsuit one could see that the reason is revenge and malicious since nothig has been proved yet. Like harm their reputation BEFORE it gets to a court to decide. That sounds a bit malicious to me but I am not a lawyer. Run it by yours in case it has merit.
FEDERAL COURT
DirecTV suing 7 over stolen services
SCRANTON - Taking the offensive against viewers it alleges are stealing its satellite signal, DirecTV, Inc. has filed a federal lawsuit that seeks tens of thousands of dollars in damages from seven residents in six area counties, including one each from Luzerne and Lackawanna.
The suit is among at least 250 suits filed nationwide in a crackdown the company hopes will halt the interception of its signals, which is a violation of several federal laws, spokesman Robert Mercer said Friday.
The company previously targeted only suppliers of devices that allow its signals to be intercepted, but it recently turned its focus to the purchasers of the devices, known as end-users.
"We're sending a very clear message to consumers: You cannot steal our signal with impunity," Mercer said. "There are people who wouldn't dream of stealing an apple off a fruit stand, yet they think nothing of stealing a satellite TV signal. ... It's stealing - no different than hot wiring a Honda or walking into a local drug store and shoplifting."
DirecTV is the nation's largest satellite programming provider with 10.5 million subscribers. Its signal is beamed to a satellite dish installed in a home, which then sends the signal through a receiver that "descrambles" it so the programs can be viewed.
The descrambling is achieved through an access card the size of a credit card that is inserted into the satellite receiver. Customers pay a monthly fee based on the number of channels they wish to view.
The problem is with pirated access cards and other devices that allow users to descramble the DirecTV signal without paying the company for it. The pirate cards, which usually sell for $200 to $300, typically last a few months - until the company sends an electronic signal through its satellite that short-circuits them, Mercer said.
The cards work only with legitimate DirecTV satellite receivers. Mercer said a typical signal theft case involves a person who purchases a low-end programing package, then obtains a pirate card to allow them to get all programming.
Mercer said it's difficult to calculate how much revenue the company loses each year because it doesn't know how many pirated cards are in use. But the firm estimates a pirated card can steal programming valued at up to $100,000 a year._ (obviously crap by what he says above, ME).
The local suit, filed May 29 in the U.S. District Court of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in Scranton, targets seven people the company identified through billing records obtained through a search warrant served last year on one of the major distributors of pirated access cards, Vector Technologies of Kentucky.
Among the defendants is Mark Murgallis of Wyoming Street, Ashley, who is accused of obtaining supplies that would allow him to reprogram a legitimate DirecTV card so that it could receive additional programing for which he did not pay.
Murgallis did not immediately return a phone message left with his wife Friday afternoon.
Mercer said DirecTV sent letters to all people identified through the Vector Technologies case, offering them the chance to avoid liability if they sent in their pirated devices. The company filed suit only against those who did not reply to the letter or refused to comply with its demands, he said. He did not know how many letters were sent.
The other defendants named in the local suit are: Jason Miller of Dover; John Troup III of Harrisburg; Michael Calabrese of Mechanicsburg; Matt Griggs of Dalton; Jennifer Hecker of Port Matilda and Wayne Nocton of Waynesboro.
The suit seeks hefty damages ranging from $10,000-$100,000 for each violation of federal law. Mercer said the company "is very serious" about seeking recovery of those sums.
"We've invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the system, the satellites and the programming. ... This stuff is not just put out there for free."
End-users could be charged criminally, but typically criminal cases have been pursued only against distributors and manufacturers of the pirate cards, Mercer said.
Mercer said he hopes media coverage of the company's aggressive stance against end-users will help get the message across of how serious the situation is.
"If we can educate consumers -and it's a tough way to educate them - that stealing satellite signals is against federal law and they can get in a lot of trouble for it, maybe we can make some headway."
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkblack.gif
Thanks & Good Luck,
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/rotate_rib.gif
To The REAL King!!
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/satelliterights.gif
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/freedomblack.gif
Our Deepest Condolences one year later too (http://www.legal-rights.org/condolences.html) <-- Click here Please
Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT CENSORSHIP 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!