PDA

View Full Version : An Excuse For "The Letter"


BrainDamage
November 29th, 2002, 10:27 AM
I am posting this in the TP because I think it is B.S. On the other hand, it might just work. What do you think?

I know several people (so far, not me) who have received the extorsion letter from Dave.

Here is what one of my friends is going to do:

He is going to call the attorney and say he answered a letter in the local "Bargain Trader". For those who have never heard of it, it is one of those local papers with people selling stuff.. kind of like a garage sale without the garage.

Anyway, he is going to say someone was advertising a satellite system for a cheap price, so he called. The installer (seller) showed up, installed the dish and receivers, and said the system was not working and he needed a part because of the way his house was cabled before by the cable company. The installer told him to order an item, told him where to order it from, and told him that when it showed up to call the installer back.

When he got the item, he called the installer. The installer came out, still could not make the system work, and left saying he installed the part in the attic and would have to return to try again with a different part.

He will say "I am not sure what you say I bought, but I do not have it. This all happened 3 years ago, so I really have no other details."

The end.

Do you think this could work?

It shows that there is NO intent. It shows that the installer has the part, not the recipient of the letter, and that is that. My friend has ALWAYS had a subscription, which started about the same time as the ordering of the devices.

I told my friend that he is digging himself a deeper hole, but, a part of me thinks that it might just be a good enough excuse.

RD24601
November 29th, 2002, 01:48 PM
I agree that your friend is just playing DAVE's game. By answering at all, it may give DAVE's attorneys the taste of blood they are looking for.

People need to understand what is and isn't against the law. State and Federal legislators can make pretty much ANYTHING illegal, including owning devices used for hacking DAVE / Charlie cards. Currently there has NOT been any such Federal legislation. I don't know for sure but I don't think there has been any such legislation at ANY state level either.

So, that being the case, DTV can only be pursuing a civil suite rather than a criminal suite. The civil suite would not hold up because, in a civil suite, they can only sue for damages they have received due to your actions. It would be nearly impossible to make a valid argument on how much TV one has or hasn't watched. Not to mention the fact that most stuff sold (namely the iso 7816 programmers) have other industrial uses, making it even harder for DAVE to prove any damages to him.

I haven't gotten any such letter but if I did, I think I'd throw it away. I wish your friend luck but I think I'd not answer DAVE at all.

rd24601