My DTV Letter......

[lawdawg]

First, thanks to everyone who has posted, it makes for interesting reading. I now know more about DTV than I ever wanted too.

I got my first letter in the mail last week, it states the usual; I allegedly purchased a bootloader from a company on the Internet, they want $3500 non-negotiable, any devices I might have, and a letter. I will admit I panicked at first, I did not realize that this was one of many letters people were receiving all over Florida. I called the attorney on the letter and asked them what this was about. I explained to them that I never owned a satellite or had any service from DTV. They did not care, only that they wanted the money. I asked what kind of proof they had. I was told they had an invoice with my name, address, e-mail, and a phone number. The e-mail was an old account from AOL, the cell phone number was a pre-pay phone from years ago. I asked how it was paid for, Sal or Sol, said it was paid for with a credit card. I told him that I would have to do some checking to see if someone else might have ordered it. Sal said he would send me a copy of the invoice.

The next day I received a call from Mr. Boatman, he was unaware that Sal had called the day before. He explained the same thing to me that Sal had, and that they wanted the money. I asked Mr. Boatman how the boot loader was paid for. He told me there was no record of payment only that it was ordered. I explained to him that I would have to do some checking, that I never ordered the device and that I never had a satellite dish. He said that he then needed a name of the person who ordered it.

I got the invoice in the mail today. It is a printout with the word evidence on the top of the page. There is my name, address, cell phone number, and an old e-mail screen name. However there is no record of payment, the spot that says credit card it is blank, and there is no type of credit card listed. So basically they have SQUAT. They have no proof of possession, or that I even paid for it.

Now I will sit and wait until they write me another letter, I will then explain my position that they have no case and that I will not settle.

The kicker to all of this is, I am a Police Officer; I have never done what they accuse, I will not settle for something I have not done. I do not know what this might do to my career or future job prospects. So now it is a wait and see, I will update when I get more info.

[fredchu]

No ofense :) But if ya're a Police Officer and you never bought a bootloader or whatever I wonder what ya doing wondering around the Den :)

Just looks a bit outta wack here :)

[lawdawg]

I did find this site by doing a search. I needed information; this is the best place to find it. I have read most of the post and now have a better understanding about the letters. I have contacted the FTC, also my state representatives; I have talked to the local prosecutors to get their opinion. My next stop is to the assistant federal prosecutor to get his take on all of this. If you have done something wrong or broken the law then you should be punished. If you haven’t then you should not be bullied by strong-armed tactics.

[REDx]

well ill tell ya a aol screen name and
account is really easy to steal.
once you have the screen name and account
getting your billing address used to be
as easy as makeing a phone call to aol's
billing department. in the past few weeks
they closed that door:mad: lol.
there is a person who goes by the name
SC REAPER that was doing it out of DSS
beginners. till he got caught by myself
with help of a few other. he used the credit
card info form there permium member site
to steal the info he was a mod there.
check your aol billing info and see if
your account is being used when you know
your not on. or try to change your password.

[centric]

I've known an officer with the same 3m on his card that the mayor was running. Not that this makes it right nor do I have any less respect for my officer friend nor am I implying that officers think they are above the law. I'm just stating a fact as I know it.

[lawdawg]

I will be the first to tell you that there are bad cops out there. It’s a shame that someone would work at a job where the public is suppose to trust you only to then misuse that trust. I would wager a bet that some of these attorneys suing people on behalf of DTV do not pay for satellite TV, and its not because DTV is giving it to them for free.:gg

[tunamandude]

no more feet in my own mouth edited8 16

[ALittleBirdie]

A bit paranoid tunamandude? How cares if the FBI is watching...alot of people here just post in the legal forums (myself included). Last time I checked there was nothing preventing me from discussing what is going in legal world (unless DTV has recently been lobbying for and suceeded in making discussion and research of DirecTv court cases illegal...punishable by $3500 fine of course). If you didn't do it and didn't claim to do it, what is the harm in proclaiming you innocence? None.

I'm originally from Palm Beach Garduhens and illegals washing up on the shore of Singer Island or Juno Beach is nothing new. It's been and probably always will be commonplace everywhere in South Floriduh...might actually be good for South Florida (every seen the kitchen help in your favorite restaurant?) and god forbid a little conservative blood wash up on the shores of liberal land.

[tunamandude]

no more feet in my own mouth edited 8 17 boy i used thing i had freedom of speech guess not

[REDx]

Ooo kayyy:R

[godzla]

Originally posted by lawdawg
If you have done something wrong or broken the law then you should be punished.

The fact that there are laws against something in no way means that the laws are just. As an example, many states still have old laws on the books against engaging in oral ---.

Who the hell gave DTV permission to beam it's satellite transmission onto my property anyway? Are there no laws against trespassing?

[lawdawg]

This is not a police state; I can freely go to any web site I wish to, to do research. To me this is what the den is for, research. As far as I am concerned DTV has no case against me, if they sent the FBI to take pictures of a dish, then they got the wrong condo, I have never owned a dish. I am not a police officer from Delray Beach; I am a cop somewhere in the state of Florida though.

Police often go to questionable web sites, (not that this is one), to do research of a particular crime they want information on. I came to this site after doing a search on a search engine. I lurked for a while before I decided to post for myself.

I am willing to field questions about the law if you have any. I can tell you this, there are certain elements of a crime that must be proved before you can be found guilty of a crime. If the elements have not been met there is no crime. This is why I feel DTV does not have a case against me; they have not met the elements.

I have nothing to hide, if DTV is scared of this site and the information you all provide… Oh Well!!! I will exercise my constitutional rights and do whatever I see fit to help prove my innocents.

[lawdawg]

Originally posted by godzla
The fact that there are laws against something in no way means that the laws are just. As an example, many states still have old laws on the books against engaging in oral ---.

Who the hell gave DTV permission to beam it's satellite transmission onto my property anyway? Are there no laws against trespassing?

Statements like this will not help anyone. What has DTV done to injure you? Sending a signal through the air is not trespassing. Putting a receiver on your property without your permission is trespassing. Sending an agent to look around your yard without a search warrant is trespassing. Do you have any idea how many signals go through the air? Cell phone, cordless phone, radio, TV, computer, the list is endless.:R

[newideas]

This thread is interesting to me because there is a whole
web of guys in my neck of the woods headed by, you guessed
it, a cop. He tried to get me to buy in and told him in '00
that "I didn't want that stuff around" and they called me
paranoid (I'm not really into TV).
He said he was related to specific Feds (no more details,
sorry) and they were only interested in dealers. Well, about
a month ago his vehicle was seen making a lot of 3AM trips
and there was a lot of power digging noises the neighbors heard.
I guess he learned the meaning of "underground". I wonder if
he got "the letter" or knows something new?

[lawdawg]

I also knew some cops that did "the thing". It's amazing, we are suppose to arrest law breakers, but then certain cops break the law themselves. Kinda like some of these attorneys sending out letters about pirated signals, getting pirated signals themselves, ironic.. :gg

[godzla]

Originally posted by lawdawg
Do you have any idea how many signals go through the air?

Yes, I'm fully aware and the air is public domain. I firmly believe that someone with the know how to capture a signal cast into this public domain should be allowed. After all DTV isn't leasing or paying anyone for the air unlike cable companies paying/leasing the land and utility poles holding their cable. The burden is upon the sender to protect their signal in a public domain if they don't want certain people to use it.

I don't like what is happening to you, but I must disagree with persons who believe that laws against use of a public domain are fair or legitimate.:confused:

[lawdawg]

It has been said that the technology DTV uses to secure their signal is like locking up Fort Knox with a bicycle lock. That being said, if you didn’t pay for the signal, why would you think that you are entitled to use it?

[godzla]

You will need a better analogy than that to make your point as Fort Knox is not PUBLIC DOMAIN!

Persons in law enforcement are trained to enforce the laws period. Whether the laws are just or not is not their decision. This attitude is part of the mental conditioning of those in law enforcement.

Try thinking about it this way: I place some money into a locked box and bury it in a public park. Someone else happens along with a metal detecter and finds it and digs it up. They then break the lock or pry open the box open and take the money. Can I claim they stole it?

NO! I left the money in a public domain and failed to adequately protect it from others who may find it in this PUBLIC DOMAIN.

[lawdawg]

You missed the point. Yes it is easy to steal the signal. Does that mean you should? No

[newideas]

I've got a neighbor just like this: he says his land is his and
his deed includes his airspace (this is legally true, and why
skyscrapers get built). What comes across his airspace belongs to him...I don't know...would a neighbor's horse be his if it wandered on to his land? Really, nobody owns land...it can be condemned, etc.
On the other hand, when has a major corporation seemed so much like
a federal taskforce? Anyone seen "Brazil"?

[godzla]

I'm afraid you don't get the point and probably never will. You've apparently been programmed not to think on your own and to believe that all laws are right regardless of legitimacy.

It is NOT stealing because it is a PUBLIC DOMAIN. What don't you get about that?

BTW, how do you know it's "easy to steal the signal"? How can you make a judgement about doing something that you claim you have never done? Something's fishy here?

[tunamandude]

no more feet in my own mouth and if your looking for stuff i wrote too bad edited 8 17

[BuzzSawOne]

Well LawDog, all I am going to say on this subject is this.....
I pay for cable and would never attempt to hack it.. DTV is merely a hobby, it teaches me how to code, were it not for the nearly instant gratification (wow! I did it right, I have channels) I would have bored long ago and quit.
DTV has a right in my opinion to go after dealers. They are "stealing" the technology to make a fast buck (and millions in some cases). I am using a technology and a product that if it were to be paid for (I canceled DTV years ago) I would never order it. How can they say then, that they are losing money from me? IF I would not buy their product anyway, there is nothing for them to lose. Now if I am programming cards for others (haven't/wouldn't), then they would have the right to say they are losing money, as most will pay for DTV if they cannot get it for free.
Since you are in Florida, try this one. A hooker offers --- to me for free. You are on the vice squad.... If I do not pay for it, is it solicitation just cause shes a hooker? Or do you have to prove I paid for it? Poor analogy, but the point is that USE OF PRODUCT must come into play before deciding whether pursuing case is the right thing to do.

Buzz

[BuzzSawOne]

What comes across his airspace belongs to him...I don't know...would a neighbor's horse be his if it wandered on to his land?
Well, you would be able to remove the horse...... And, it would be like the farmer suing you for stealing his fertilizer if the horse came into YOUR yard, crapped, and you used it on your flowerbeds....

Buzz;)

[BuzzSawOne]

Yes, I'm fully aware and the air is public domain. I firmly believe that someone with the know how to capture a signal cast into this public domain should be allowed. After all DTV isn't leasing or paying anyone for the air unlike cable companies paying/leasing the land and utility poles holding their cable. The burden is upon the sender to protect their signal in a public domain if they don't want certain people to use it.

BRAVO Godzla!!! BRAVO!

Been my exact sentiment for a LOOOOOOONG time! But of course, common sense and laws parted ways many many years ago.... It's right if there is money in it for those that make the laws, and allow us our rights!

Buzz:Z

[L Rissler SI]

Originally posted by BuzzSawOne

Since you are in Florida, try this one. A hooker offers --- to me for free. You are on the vice squad.... If I do not pay for it, is it solicitation just cause shes a hooker? Or do you have to prove I paid for it?

Come on LawDawg!!! We all are dying to hear the answer to this one.

[lawdawg]

First of all I am not a corrections officer, was, but not now, and not 27. (I wish).

I did find this site by doing a search. Up until I got the letter I had no idea there were so many letters being sent out. A friend of mine in Arizona got one, but that was a while ago. While doing research I came across an article at the legal-rights.org site, which talked about how easy it was to steal the signal (allegedly). Example “locking up Fort Knox with a bicycle lock.”, it was supposedly in a magazine article.

If you didn’t pay the hooker, then it’s not illegal. Her profession has nothing to do with it. You go to a strip club and get lucky enough to take one home to have --- with. Is that illegal? No, only if you pay for it. Even if she asks, its only solicitation if money is part of the deal.

Sorry it took so long for a response, had a couple of days off.

Any other questions?

[lawdawg]

Originally posted by tunamandude
by the way what is on that card over at the corrections tv? opps!

At the prison I worked at, they only got what the antenna on the roof picked up. No cable, no movies, no DTV.

[lawdawg]

Originally posted by godzla
I'm afraid you don't get the point and probably never will. You've apparently been programmed not to think on your own and to believe that all laws are right regardless of legitimacy.

It is NOT stealing because it is a PUBLIC DOMAIN. What don't you get about that?

BTW, how do you know it's "easy to steal the signal"? How can you make a judgement about doing something that you claim you have never done? Something's fishy here? Never done drugs, that doesn't mean I do not know the effects, or that they are easy to get.

What’s the deal? If you need an authority figure to vent on then by all means go ahead, I don’t mind. The PUBLIC DOMAIN excuse will not work in court, so why argue about it? Lets be productive and discuss what will work, and the options people have.


:)

[godzla]

Originally posted by lawdawg
What’s the deal? If you need an authority figure to vent on then by all means go ahead, I don’t mind.

I am not sure if you are an authority figure and don't really care. My beef is with the attitude. I don't appreciate the attitude that a law is legitimate and fair purely because it is a law. You come here and insinuate that anyone testing is a criminal breaking the law and seek help from the same. Can't speak for everyone else, but it rubs me wrong. Personally, I have a platinum sub and have for quite some time. I dabble because its interesting and fun. I pay for the signal, but just like playing with toys.

[fixter]

If I'm correct, the radio act of 1927 states that the airwaves belong to the public and con not be owned. Sometime in the 60's there was a law that said citizens have a right to monitor the airwaves. That is why it is legal to listen to police radio etc. Just curious if this has been explored at all.

[lawdawg]

Originally posted by godzla
I am not sure if you are an authority figure and don't really care. My beef is with the attitude. I don't appreciate the attitude that a law is legitimate and fair purely because it is a law. You come here and insinuate that anyone testing is a criminal breaking the law and seek help from the same. Can't speak for everyone else, but it rubs me wrong. Personally, I have a platinum sub and have for quite some time. I dabble because its interesting and fun. I pay for the signal, but just like playing with toys.

Take a deep breath and relax... OK, now when did I say "that a law is legitimate and fair purely because it is a law?" If anyone knows of the stupid laws out there its me. You have no idea the amount of time the legislature spends on coming up with dumb laws, and the amount of time we spend enforcing them.

“You come here and insinuate that anyone testing is a criminal breaking the law and seek help from the same.”, I never insinuated that. Actually you attacked me in asking why would I come here if I didn’t test? How did I know it was easy to steal the signal? I came here looking for answers. I decided to post what was going on with my letter, being a police officer I can give a different slant on this. I have also agreed to answer questions about the law from where I sit. About search warrants, talking to the cops, etc..

Instead of a he said she said, why not get back to the real reason we are all here. Lets figure out a way to deal with this problem. Lets stop attaking each other,be productive and discuss what will work, and the options people have.





:) :)

[JD490]

Federal law says you can't intercept electronic messages that were not intended to be sent to you. Just because the messages are sent by radio wave it doesn’t matter. Its like this if you are driving down a road and a bag of money fly's out of a armored truck and lands in the front seat of your car you are committing bank robbery if you drive off and don't turn the money in. If the signel is sent in the clear and has no encryption then it would be fine for everyone to hook up a receiver and watch that channel. Much like a big dish watching CSPAN or PBS. Not sure if its is still sent in the clear, but I think it is.

[BuzzSawOne]

Yeah, just like if you pilfer the company coffers and line your pockets, wipe out everybodys retirement, then you will be tracked down, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law..... Right?
That is, unless you are a wealthy and powerful CEO of, let's say, ENRON, WORLDCOM, HASBRO.... Need I say more? They can kiss my ass, them and their stupid DMCA. They need to go after the ones that really hurt society, not the ones that are no more than an irritating splinter on the ass of a wealthy corporation!

Buzz

[rc76]

Originally posted by tunamandude
Ok ALittleBirdie. you say im a little paraonoid. Realy im Mad. Law dog is making himself look bad as a cop. of course he is innocent of not buying that bootloader. and as far as illegals washing up. i think feds need to use everything in there power to watch the coast. it dont look good having our shores so easily to get in at this time. hell we were attacked, like 3000plus killed why cant they use every ounce of energy to catch terroist. not chase people for this right now. if im ever paranoid about somthing, it's of getting hit again by these fu ing terrosits! also did you Forget That quite a few of the bastards terroist were right in the backyard of Delray Beach florida. yes the same town were other so called inocent police watch what the feds waste time doing stings and opperations for dtv. Who Knows You Might Have Even Walked By Him One day on singer island beach. that atta terrosit!


RUNNING STINGS AND OPERATIONS FOR DAVE .......NOW THAT NOW THATS PROTECTING INNOCENT PEOPLE............GUESS IF YOU HAVE ALOT OF MONEY YOU HAVE PRIORITY OVER LITTLE DUDES LIKE US:K .....----ERS!!!

[rc76]

Originally posted by newideas
This thread is interesting to me because there is a whole
web of guys in my neck of the woods headed by, you guessed
it, a cop. He tried to get me to buy in and told him in '00
that "I didn't want that stuff around" and they called me
paranoid (I'm not really into TV).
He said he was related to specific Feds (no more details,
sorry) and they were only interested in dealers. Well, about
a month ago his vehicle was seen making a lot of 3AM trips
and there was a lot of power digging noises the neighbors heard.
I guess he learned the meaning of "underground". I wonder if
he got "the letter" or knows something new?


:D :D :gg

[lawdawg]

The American people decide what they want, if the only ones talking are the ones with the money then they are the being listened too. Even if I think a law is stupid, if it is brought to my attention that a law is being violated I have to act. Not acting is against the law. There is a city south of me; the city counsel has decided it does not want neon signs in the windows of local business. The passed an ordinance making it a violation to have the signs. Now someone has to go to these places and give them a $200 ticket everyday. Yes it is a stupid law/ordinance, but it is still enforceable. We make the change, we put the people in Washington. If you don’t like it vote them out, and if you don’t vote ythen you can’t complain. :gg

Is it fair? No, but it is the law. :mad:

[fixter]

Originally posted by lawdawg
The American people decide what they want, if the only ones talking are the ones with the money then they are the being listened too. Even if I think a law is stupid, if it is brought to my attention that a law is being violated I have to act. Not acting is against the law. There is a city south of me; the city counsel has decided it does not want neon signs in the windows of local business. The passed an ordinance making it a violation to have the signs. Now someone has to go to these places and give them a $200 ticket everyday. Yes it is a stupid law/ordinance, but it is still enforceable. We make the change, we put the people in Washington. If you don’t like it vote them out, and if you don’t vote ythen you can’t complain. :gg

Is it fair? No, but it is the law. :mad: Hmmm if that were true then Al Gore would be president.

[godzla]

And people wonder why some say "fuk it, I've had enough" and commit violent acts. I wonder what North Korea or China would charge to knock out one of Daves satellites?

[bigolin]

Just because it's law don't make it right

[lawdawg]

"Hmmm if that were true then Al Gore would be president", that goes back to the money thing.


"Just because it's law don't make it right", nor does it make it wrong. But it is the law and if you break it you might/could/possibly be prosecuted and punished for breaking it. Just because you break the law doesn't mean you go to jail, or are punished for it.