Another Rediculous Letter?

[jlmcco03]

Hey, if all a person bought was a programmer, a 3 in 1 unlooper programmer loader with NO atmel flash, and some bootloaders, then this stuff is legal correct. Should the letter just be ignored or what the hell should this person do??? Thanks in advance.



Ignoring the letter is the surest way of getting a $10,000.00 plus lawyers fees as a judgement against you. It also does NOT matter if it had an atmel or not, its dependant on what YOUR intended usage was. If it was for a different purpose than DirecTV™ then you may be OK by proving that but if it was intended to reprogram DirecTV™ cards you may have trouble.

Contact a lawyer for proper advice. There are several experienced ones listed at:

http://www.Legal-rights.org/uslawyer.html

Regards

To The Real King!!

[BrainDamage]

No offense intended here, but this has been answered ad naseum.. do a search for LETTER and you will see what I mean.

But, to answer some of the question, a boot loader has but one purpose in life, and that is to bypass a Black Sunday H card.

So, if you try and B.S. your way out of that, you may wind up in deeper trouple.

I would ask an attorney to find out what they say you bought. Sometimes they do not even know what you bought, they only know that you bought 'something'.

[ALittleBirdie]

Originally posted by TTRK
Ignoring the letter is the surest way of getting a $10,000.00 plus lawyers fees as a judgement against you. It alsodoes NOT matter if it had an atmel or not, its dependant on what YOUR intended usage was. If it was for a different purpose than DirecTV™ then you may be OK by proving that but if it was intended to reprogram DirecTV™ cards you may have trouble.

Ignoring a summons is the surest way of getting a $10,000.00 plus lawyers fees as a judgement against you. Ignoring a letter is a way of sending a message you're not interested in settling (even DirecTv concedes as much in the letter). It may not be the best way to send that message (that probably would be to have a lawyer do it)...but you will not get a $10,000 judgement against you for avoiding DTV's "fan mail".

[jlmcco03]

I know for a FACT that bootloaders were advertised as surge protectors, so how can they say that someone with a bootloader is stealing their TV??? Thats bogus......not to mention the fact that they have to PROVE that a particular person bought and used the bootloader! How can a surge protector be illegal??????? B.S.

[ALittleBirdie]

Originally posted by jlmcco03
I know for a FACT that bootloaders were advertised as surge protectors, so how can they say that someone with a bootloader is stealing their TV??? Thats bogus......not to mention the fact that they have to PROVE that a particular person bought and used the bootloader! How can a surge protector be illegal??????? B.S.
Not that I question whether they were advertised as such...but a "bootloader" would not be of much use in the event of an electrical surge.

[no1b4me]

Guys this has already been discussed a length here at the DEN. Do a search!!! Try to detach yourself from the current situation. Being in denial about the letter or the alleged purchase really doesn’t help you much. You need to understand that the legality of the devices is not in question here. There is only one real legal question that DirecTV® wants legally answered; was the purchased device used to commit an illegal act? Specifically was it used to illegally receive DirecTV’s service? AFAIK the legality of possessing the alleged device is not even addressed in the civil complaint filed against end users. Usually the quoted statues in end user cases are 18 USC 2510, 18 USC 2511 and 47 USC 605 (I think...need to check but I’m fairly sure).

No court of the land has determined that Bootloaders, Smart Card Readers (SCR) or Unloopers are illegal as of yet however under the DMCA these devices do appear to have legal issues except the SCR. The assumption made by DirecTV® is that if you purchased the device form a place that has in the past advertised these devices as being capable of defrauding DirecTV®, perhaps you did use the device in the manner advertised. If you can legally prove otherwise then you are welcome to civil court to prove it. If you didn’t use the device as alleged by DirecTV® or didn't have anything to do with theft of service and can provide credible evidence to support your claim then DirecTV® will lose its case. The catch 22 here is that you have to swear under oath that you did not use the device in question in the manner alleged by DirecTV®. The magic phases here are ‘credible evidence to support your claim’ and ‘under oath’. Perjury is serious business so be absolutely sure of what you claim under oath.

Getting back to the legal issue of possession, consider a common household item, say, a lamp. Is a lamp illegal? No but if you kill someone with it you will be prosecuted for the act of murder. It is not the legality of the item but rather how the item is being used.

I’m not in favor of DirecTV’s letter campaign or their questionable legal tactics however I think that addressing what I consider misconceptions benefits us all in the long run. Lately I have found myself going against the grain here on legal issues, and at times it even appear that I favor DirecTV®, but what I really want is to inform you as best I can so you don’t make a mistake that you may regret in the future. Not to long ago I too thought very similar about this whole issue (do a search and you’ll see) but researching the subject for the past 3 months has changed my outlook on this issue. Particularly researching the DMCA, the above mentioned USC titles, civil court proceedings and cases somehow related to this subject all have dramatically impacted my views on this affair. I urge you to take the time and research the subject as well. Whatever you do, don’t be foolish. Talk to a lawyer if you are in any legal difficulty; the sooner the better. Ask yourself this question would you let a layman fix the breaks on your car or would you take it to an experience break specialist?

Regards,

[condmca]

Originally posted by ALittleBirdie
Ignoring a summons is the surest way of getting a $10,000.00 plus lawyers fees as a judgement against you. Ignoring a letter is a way of sending a message you're not interested in settling (even DirecTv concedes as much in the letter). It may not be the best way to send that message (that probably would be to have a lawyer do it)...but you will not get a $10,000 judgement against you for avoiding DTV's "fan mail".

ALittleBirdie,
It's great having you here in the legal forums!:D
Once again you've taken the words right outta my mouth...
$10,000.00 for ignoring the demand letter is just the type of misinformation that leads individuals to settle.

Jlmcco03,
Have some fun with the stupid demand letter by taking it with you to some GM dealer.
Ask to speak with the sales manager and raise some hell.
Let them know that you make no distinction between GM the car company and GMH, Directv.
Let them know how pissed-off you are that a company would even attempt extorting money out of a customer based on nothing more than a hunch. Let them know too that you might never do business with a company that sponsers such terrorism.
In the end, the potential loss of $30,000-$40,000 worth of revenue to the car company will speak volumes more than dealing with directv. Remeber too that this is how capitalism works, so work the system and best of luck to you!:)

[JD490]

You get a letter here is your choices.
1. settle pay 3500 or more.
2. ignore the letter or say you wont settle. They might sue or not. If they do your legal fees will be way more then 3500. They know this thats why they ask for that amount.
3. Try to work a deal where you sign an affidavid saying you used the devices for legal purposes. Some call this going through discovery.

[REDx]

no1b4me i am very glad you are posting
in this section. i have read a large
number of your posts in the technical
sections of the DEN. you are smart as
well as whitty. your logic is inpeccable.
anyone who has followed you knows you
only have the best interest of the members
in your heart. my favorite post to date
in this section by you is the one where
write. the courts my look at these letters
as a courtesy. it really got me to thinking.
there a few here who can carry on a debate.
without resorting to calling people that
defeat them with facts as dtv shills.
those people hope if they say dtv cant
win enough times it will come true lol.
once people come out of denial they dont
pay any attention to em any way lol.

[REDx]

quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Ignoring the letter is the surest way of getting a $10,000.00 plus lawyers fees as a judgement against you. It also does NOT matter if it had an atmel or not, its dependant on what YOUR intended usage was. If it was for a different purpose than DirecTV™ then you may be OK by proving that but if it was intended to reprogram DirecTV™ cards you may have trouble.

Contact a lawyer for proper advice. There are several experienced ones listed at:

http://www.Legal-rights.org/uslawyer.html

Regards

To The Real King!!
Originally posted by condmca

$10,000.00 for ignoring the demand letter is just the type of misinformation that leads individuals to settle.

you are just unbelievable how in the hell
can you accuse TTRK of spreading misinformation.
get back on your medication. those voices you
hear are not real. my god man get a grip.:R

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Guys,

I cannot believe how people want to cut slices by silly inane semantics instead of using their heads. If you get a letter and ignore it, what has that done to advance your case??? All that will happen is that you will get letter number 2 later on. Now you can ignore that too but to absolutely no benefit to you and a lot of benefit to DirecTV™. They LOVE late starters.

Now you get a summons and you are simply a johnny-come-lately having done no work to get information on your situation. Late and in hurry NOW you contact a lawyer to get the information you would have obtained had you done that on the first letters reception, months ago. Now hurry up and wait, you have only a few days to be prepared!!.

Could someone explain to me how not being prepared, not having done work that you previously would have had 3 months or more to do, lots of time to research the issue and now being rushed as hell is in any way beneficial to you? I like benefitial things, but this ain't one of them.

In my world being prepared and developing a strategy, planning are all a vantages and having the time to do so is important. What makes you think that by the time you get the summons, the lawyers you want will be available. Perhaps they will be busy and you will have to settle for a second class guy.

Well to those cutting illogic by semantics, enjoy your rush and to those with brains, contact a lawyer just as soon as you know they are coming (first letter) and give yourself lots of time to do research, save some money and put yourself into a winning position. Not only can you save by doing much of the research, your lawyer wont be able to give you any fast shuffles because you will knew all about a proper strategy, DTV's weaknesses, your strengths and how to handle the whole thing by now. And you will have learned how the legal system works, much to your benefit.

Make yourself a winner and let the last-minute-jacks try to figure out their position with no time left at the 11th hour.

Good Luck even though the astute guys know it has much more to do with smart thoughts and the right action than luck for you and the late guys , well they need luck since they have nothing much else.http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif

And for some guys, remember the cardinal rule.

NEVER do today what you can put off and delay until later.

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/niceday.gif
Thanks & Good Luck ,

<a href="mailto:ttrk@legal-rights.org"><font color="#FF0000" size="5"><strong><u>To </u></strong></font><font color="#FF4800" size="5"><strong><u>Th</u></strong></font><font color="#FF6200" size="5"><strong><u>e </u></strong></font><font color="#FF7002" size="5"><strong><u>RE</u></strong></font><font color="#FF9006" size="5"><strong><u>AL </u></strong></font><font color="#FFB508" size="5"><strong><u>Ki</u></strong></font><font color="#FFD014" size="5"><strong><u>ng!!</u></strong></font></a>

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/satelliterights.gif
<a href="http://www.legal-rights.org/dtv/classaction.html" target=blank> <img src="http://www.legal-rights.org/images/classaction.gif"></a>

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/freedomblack.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 CONSTITUTIONAL BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

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

[condmca]

Originally posted by REDx

you are just unbelievable how in the hell
can you accuse TTRK of spreading misinformation.
get back on your medication. those voices you
hear are not real. my god man get a grip.:R

I saw the greatest South Park once where the gang pit Tweak vs. another kid in the hopes of seeing a fight--it was friggin' Hilarious!
...Red, you're kinda like Eric Cartmen here with this attempt at pitting me against TTRK :) but it's all good. ;)

I respect TTRK enough to not single him out in here. You may have noticed that I even responded to another post that addressed the $10,000 issue in order to be indirect. But, for the record, YES, I DO take issue with the way it was insinuated that people would be facing $10,000 or more for simply ignoring a letter that merely THREATENS to sue someone. Remember, it's just a demand letter and not a summons.

Peace:cool:

[ALittleBirdie]

Originally posted by condmca

I respect TTRK enough to not single him out in here. You may have noticed that I even responded to another post that addressed the $10,000 issue in order to be indirect. But, for the record, YES, I DO take issue with the way it was insinuated that people would be facing $10,000 or more for simply ignoring a letter that merely THREATENS to sue someone. Remember, it's just a demand letter and not a summons.

Peace:cool:
I probably should have been more clear in reference to the term "ignore". I see nothing wrong with not contacting DirecTv (via a lawyer) if you receive the letter and no one is going to convince me otherwise ;). It's a gamble, with odds such that, as long as you're not gambling something you can't afford to lose, there is nothing foolish about it. That being said, nobody should "ignore" the letter by putting it completely out their mind and not preparing for the worst case scenario...that's dumb. If you can afford a lawyer you should at least start shopping around and if you can't you should start learning how to respond to a summons and look at examples on PACER.

[JD490]

If a person has no intention of settling with DTV why bother contacting them in any way. I know 2 friends that ignored the letters and said if they get a summons then they will contact a lawyer. They don't need to spend money on lawyers until they are sued. DTV will never change there mind if they are going to sue you or not if you contact them. My 2 friends got letters in Jan of 02 ignored them and never got a summons. Doesn't mean they won't, but why spend money if they haven't been sued. Why do you think the local news runs these DAVE filed lawsuit against end users. This is to try and scare letter recipients into contacting them. Once you contract them through a lawyer or yourself they now know you live where the information they have says. Now if you want to be sure to avoid court you can settle or try to do "discovery" with them, but once you contact them they will follow through with a lawsuit if you don't work something out in most cases.



Actually JD they do change their mind very often. As you KNOW they have sued many people yet not a single case has been settled in court. No wins and no losses. So what became of the suits. Simple, those who did not declare guilt and fought them through real discovery (not what you say) convinced them to settle for a few hundred dollars or convinced them to drop the case. Very few of those who argue the case and advise them that they will go to court ever pay more than $500.00 or even less. As DirecTV™ are the prosecutor of the case ONLY they can drop the case and they DO. What do you think happened to all these cases who oppose them.

They wont be coming to post about it since their lawyers tell them NOT to do that. They usually sign a "non disclosure" clause so they cannot post about it. But these number in the hundreds.

Let me make it clear. If you tell them or your lawyer you are guilty, they will not go down one penny. This is ONLY for the non guilty and those who fight DirecTV™. If there is ANY chance you will win in court, DirecTV™ will offer a very low settlement or will drop it completely. They cannot afford to LOSE a SINGLE CASE in court ad create case law. So they stick to their plan and drop those cases. ow they can keep on settling with people as no case law exists and many are guilty and say so.

But this is also for those who answer outraged to the first letter as any non guilty person would do. Not answering signals that the person is probably guilty to DirecTV™ an they will act on that too.

I am not sure why people think (totally wrongly) that they will not negotiate. If that was the case then some of these would get to court and there would be wins and losses.

Regards

To The Real King!!

[condmca]

Originally posted by JD490
If a person has no intention of settling with DTV why bother contacting them in any way. I know 2 friends that ignored the letters and said if they get a summons then they will contact a lawyer. They don't need to spend money on lawyers until they are sued. DTV will never change there mind if they are going to sue you or not if you contact them. My 2 friends got letters in Jan of 02 ignored them and never got a summons. Doesn't mean they won't, but why spend money if they haven't been sued. Why do you think the local news runs these DAVE filed lawsuit against end users. This is to try and scare letter recipients into contacting them. Once you contract them through a lawyer or yourself they now know you live where the information they have says. Now if you want to be sure to avoid court you can settle or try to do "discovery" with them, but once you contact them they will follow through with a lawsuit if you don't work something out in most cases.

Well said JD! :cool:
Ignoring a letter only sounds like a gamble because of the guilt we've been convinced we deserve. At the end of the day the burden will always lie with dave in securing his own product despite any technological progress we the innovators achieve.
To respond to any of these outsourced lawyers' letters is to take the bait on Dave's fishing line. To call or respond to a demand letter is to offer free information to a bunch of low-level lawyers that nobody has any obligation in even contacting.

[tcan]

Condmca,

Ignoring a letter only sounds like a gamble because of the guilt we've been convinced we deserve. At the end of the day the burden will always lie with dave in securing his own product despite any technological progress we the innovators achieve.


You have it about right! Why has Dave sent me 3 letters but not
the dreaded "Call to Court". I await shacking in fear and remorse..
Come to Papa Dave... you slimly Coward...........

[Served by DTV]

I was with you guys who say ignore the letter until you are served. Well please read my post "Payed by COD and served with Summons." I was hoping they would forget about me but they didnt. Im still going to fight them due to i paid cod and their only evidence is an old shipping invoice. I think they will file against anyone who has recieved a letter knowing that most are holding out and not settling. Even though they you do get a summons they still have to prove their case. Now depending on how many items you purcased and what method of payment you used is eityher going to give them a strong case or a week case.

[condmca]

Originally posted by Served by DTV
I was with you guys who say ignore the letter until you are served.

Huh?

You have but one post, when were you ever really with us?.
Me suspects you don't really exist at all Served By DTV.
Furthermore, me suspects that your posting here was nothing more than another lame attempt at misinforming the community :gg

[REDx]

it is just plain foolish to ignore a demand
letter from DTV. if you are innocent even
more reason to speak to a attorney. what
possible harm is there in just talking to
a lawyer who is familar with these letters.
i suspect that some who say ignore the
letters may have other motives than just
trying to help you.:R

[condmca]

Originally posted by REDx
it is just plain foolish to ignore a demand
letter from DTV.

So we've heard, it's what dave's people continue telling us despite all the evidence to the contrary :R


Originally posted by REDx
if you are innocent even
more reason to speak to a attorney.


If you are innocent you shouldn't waste one minute of your time or emotional energy worrying about dave's extortion letter.


Originally posted by REDx
what possible harm is there in just talking to
a lawyer who is familar with these letters.


For starters, most attorneys will use any opportunity to use fear against you. After all, money is made on both sides of the letter at the recipient's expense.


Originally posted by REDx
i suspect that some who say ignore the
letters may have other motives than just
trying to help you.:R

Helping people is just one of the wonderful side-benefits to the larger goal of completely debunking dave's terror campaign. Dave sponsers and creates lies and then endorses legal agents to perpetuate these lies at the expense of innocent individuals. What other motivation do I need aside from exsposing the truth to this big lie? :eek:

[no1b4me]

Let me see if I follow this logic correctly. If someone informs you that there is a mechanical problem with your car you should ignore it and perhaps drive down the freeway at 85-100 mph. Do you not see something wrong with this picture? This logic is similar in nature to the one being used when you suggest ignoring the infamous DTV letter. It is called being reckless and irresponsible. I don’t understand what is the benefit of not speaking to a lawyer for proper and professional advice. If you chose to be in denial that is all well and good but accusing members on misinforming other members is wrong. If you have your opinions and you would like to share them then do so but remember others also have the right to voice their opinion without having to put up with attacks form their piers.

The last time I checked the letter pertains to legal matters ie the law. If you are not a lawyer your advice is also an opinion and could be WRONG and hence misinformation. The best anyone can do is consult the proper authority in the field in question. Like this: When your car breaks you take it to a mechanic. When you need to build a home you go to and architect/builder. When you have health problems you see a doctor. When it pertains to the DirecTV® letter you seek the advice of a lawyer because the letter could eventually become a legal issue. Is that so hard to understand? What is there to gain by not consulting a lawyer and getting the proper advice? Are you going to save a few million bucks? Holding out and not consulting a lawyer because you don't want to spend $500 is not wise and a very bad investment of your money. Think, the $500 you are not willing to spend on a consultation will probably be wasted on movies, popcorn and the clubs. Very bad investment indeed but that could just be my dumb self.

[REDx]

no1b4me its even siller than that mr.Zakarians
office will give basic advice for free.
im tellin ya a person who dose everything in
there power to keep members from talking to
a lawyer. it makes you wonder.

[condmca]

Certainly I respect your opinion here no1b4me, so please don't take anything I say personally. You are an excellent moderator and certainly have a right to your opinion.
However, I respectfully have to disagree with a couple of the points you made in your previous post.

For starters, I don't think it's wrong at all to inform others when I think someone distorts the truth or misinforms the public at large. In fact, I think it's everyone's duty to prevent distortions of the truth from becomming the reality in here. It behooves everyone to be armed with only factual knowledge, and that is what I'm trying to establish in here when I challenge someone's assertions.
In the end it's up to the readers to judge what is logical and what is absurd and what falls in between.

Hopefully, and judging by the intelligence level of this particular forum, people will not honestly misperceive or misinterpret anything I write as being personally motivated. To do so is just not rational IMHO.
I don't personally know anybody here, and that's by design. People aren't supposed to know the person behind the alias. Whether people do know one another behind the scenes should be irrelevant.

Please take into consideration too that when I first came here many months ago, I was treated with very little respect for daring to question the authoritative voices in here.
As recently as only five-months ago, the conventional wisdom in here was TO SETTLE or face immeasurable losses. Today, more people than ever are questioning the very legitimacy of these extortion letters. Yet I'm still, on rare occassions, labelled the bad guy. As I feel I was in this thread. BTW, I don't want anybody's sympathy, I merely request the ongoing freedom to defend myself and my cool alias, while speaking out against the absurd and hopefully entertaining readers along the way. ;)

Also, please note that when I post, I'm merely testing my logic in an effort to best understand the reality of an intriguing situation. As I discover things along the way, I feel compelled to share my thoughts. If my logic fails, please point it out to me and help to make me a better person. Please feel free to post as often as redx posts in response to me. I enjoy the debate, and I believe people enjoy reading and/or participating in the debate. The last thing anyone wants in here is to feel that they're not allowed to speak the truth. God help America when people feel the need to hide the truth from the many in order to protect the hyper-sensitive few. Feel free to apply this last sentence to the here and now of this forum or the here and now of our country, they both kinda go hand-in-hand, but I digress :o

Lastly, I feel the need to look more closely at the analogy you made above no1b4me:
If someone informs you that there is a mechanical problem with your car, you need to look at the source before deciding whether or not to ignore or follow the advice. In other words, if you trust the source, you can probably trust the advice. On the other hand, if you don't even know the source that's offering the advice, you should get a second opinion.

Peace everyone :cool:
conDMCA

[REDx]

i think a search of the DTV letter history
on this forum. will reveal that the attitude
here was to ignore the letter. when they first
started appearing. i was roundly attacked here
and else were for my position.

[ELF-CO]

Originally posted by Condmca
For starters, I don't think it's wrong at all to inform others when I think someone distorts the truth or misinforms the public at large.Misinforming the public is exactly what you accomplish by continually stating incredibly bad advice such as ignoring the demand letters, or at least consulting with an attorney.As recently as only five-months ago, the conventional wisdom in here was TO SETTLE or face immeasurable losses. Today, more people than ever are questioning the very legitimacy of these extortion letters.The “conventional wisdom” in here was (and still is) to consult with an attorney. Settling or not should be an individual decision based on their specific circumstances and financial situation. (Case by case basis)Yet I'm still, on rare occassions, labelled the bad guy. As I feel I was in this thread.The only one I see consistently doing any labeling around here is YOU. Why don’t you scan all your previous posts and see how many times you have accused someone of being an agent of DTV? (You can start by re-reading this very thread if you need quick examples) This accusation is getting old… and frankly, only adds to diminish any credibility to anything you say.Lastly, I feel the need to look more closely at the analogy you made above no1b4me:
If someone informs you that there is a mechanical problem with your car, you need to look at the source before deciding whether or not to ignore or follow the advice. In other words, if you trust the source, you can probably trust the advice. On the other hand, if you don't even know the source that's offering the advice, you should get a second opinion.Sheesh… applying that same logic to the receiving of a demand letter… just HOW is this any different than seeking legal advice?? When you go to get a “second opinion”… obviously you are going to get an opinion from someone “in the field”, aren’t you? (IE: Mechanic for car advice, Dentist for dental advice, lawyer for legal advice, etc.) I fail to see any point you are trying to make, unless your goal really was to intentionally directly contradict your previous advice about contacting an attorney.

no1b4me’s previous advice (and Redx’s) is as sound as any given in this forum to date. In fact, every moderator here has said to consult with an attorney. And none of them said to ignore the demand letter. Why you continue to state otherwise is beyond me. Maybe you like to live on the edge? Fine. But suggesting that others follow suit is nothing short of careless and very bad advice.

[no1b4me]

ConDMCA, certainly an interesting rebuttal! I agree wholeheartedly that we would not have a debate without the various opinions offered by the many that chose to share them. It would be a monotonous debate, if any, if we all agreed, however things are not black or white. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle but the hard reality is that gambling is not considered an acceptable strategy in any venue. Under any other circumstance I would probably lean towards your assessment of the situation but in this case I simply can not. I do respect and value your opinions and at time find your input interesting.

I also agree that freedom of expression in any forum is paramount to any constructive and productive argument. When those basic freedoms of expressions boarder on infringing other basic freedoms expected by all, we need to take a hard look at what are the benefits of exercising our freedom of expression. This is not a matter of rights but a matter of moral judgement. There are things best not said not because you don’t have the right to state them but because the effect of stating them would outweigh any benefit gained. Surely you can appreciate this simple ethical point. Diplomacy is a wonderful thing that comes at the cost of certain freedoms; those of expressions :)

Debunking misinformation is acceptable and highly desirable but offering opinions as evidence is not the best approach. I will accept that in some cases it might have been worth it to some to totally ignore the dreaded extortion letter. Surely you could concede that in some cases that was the wrong thing to do. I think you may even agree that the costs of those actions (ignoring) have hovered around the $10,000.00 mark. The point here is that none of us hold the absolute truth on how to proceed with this matter. One thing I think we can agree on is that regardless of the differences in our opinions, it would be beneficial to obtain the most qualified professional to advise us in this matter.

I also think it would be safe to say that ultimately there isn’t any harm in seeking information and preparing for the worst. That is the gist of my whole argument. Both my parents and my college professors always taught me that information is power. Getting information and controlling it is advantageous but being unprepared is not. Unfortunately we are not all versed in the law or legal matters thus we need to seek the advise of those that hold the key that unlock the information we need to be successful in the event our gamble is fruitless. I hope you don’t miss the point I’m trying to illustrate. For clarity, my point is you should speak to a lawyer and be prepared with respect to the DirecTV® letter. I don’t think you would disagree with that. Would you? Remember I didn’t say to contact DirecTV® just to prepare in case you have defend yourself against him in the future.

[Served by DTV]

Huh?

You have but one post, when were you ever really with us?.
Me suspects you don't really exist at all Served By DTV.
Furthermore, me suspects that your posting here was nothing more than another lame attempt at misinforming the community

I was not even going to anwser you but decided it needed to be responded too. I have been on this forum for a very long time but changed my nic after being served with the summons in an attempt to further conceal my identity. Would'nt you?

Originally posted by REDx
it is just plain foolish to ignore a demand
letter from DTV. So we've heard, it's what dave's people continue telling us despite all the evidence to the contrary

[QUOTE]If you are innocent you shouldn't waste one minute of your time or emotional energy worrying about dave's extortion letter.

Believe me Code i thought this same way up until the day i was served with the Summons and was told i had 20 days to respond or lose a default judgement. It was my choice to take the ignore the letters route and nobody twisted my arm. But in hind sight it was the wrong decision. All i ask is that quit puting down people who say get legal advice. It is obvious to me that you either have never recieved a demand letter or that you have but have chose to ignore it like i did. There will be a day that you will be served and you will regret spreading the word to ignore the letters. Because when you do get served nobody from this forum will be there to give you the $3000.00-$5000.00 retainer fee that your attorney will demand in order to defend you. Nore will there be anyone from this forum to give you the $3500.00 to settle with Dave.

As recently as only five-months ago, the conventional wisdom in here was TO SETTLE or face immeasurable losses. Today, more people than ever are questioning the very legitimacy of these extortion letters.

This is where you are very wrong. 5 months ago there were many people here wanting to fight DTV claiming their letter campaign was illegal. Today there are very few people who even visit this site. Those who do visit are too afraid to post because they dont want their idenity revealed by Dave and his attorneys who visit this site. Those who have been served or are being represented by an attorney are lying low because they realize that everyone is on there own. I myself will go into hiding after this post. If you chose to label me a newbie or a spy go ahead. I just know your additude will change as mine did once i was served and realized that maybe ignoring the letters was not the best of choices. LATERZ

[condmca]

Thank you for your response no1b4me. I really can appreciate what you said and certainly do understand that all ethical considerations must be looked at when posting.
With that said, you alone get credit for changing my perception of this game.

As for the other two, Served by DTV and Red
---delete--- ...nevermind

[tcan]

IMHO
Dave’s letter scam is in reality “Malicious Prosecution” but if you follow Dave’s Scheme it will be difficult to prove. The phone script is designed to prevent you from building any evidence.

I would suggest that the proper response to Letter # 1 is a written demand letter (with a CC) for the factual information per the unfounded allegations….. State you are not a thief… and if you have some unique situation/information, that is true, use it to setup your malicious prosecution lawsuit. (they became aware & pregnant)
Registered Mail

They will respond, if your CC is noted (not to heavy), and your letter becomes evidence as to the intent of Dave’s response. If you are lucky some investigator will respond and continue the attempted extortion. (If you hire a Lawyer to respond to letter # 1 the theme will be the same but the response from Dave will be from their Lawyer).

It is at that point you need legal expertise and your lawyer will have some “meat” to use at discovery, or blow them off and get your legal costs.

[Boojer]

Unless you plan to settle ignore the letter. If you have an attorney respond to the letter and don't settle as I did you will get a summons anyway. If you ignore the summons then you have a major problem. My summons took about seven months to show up. I'm going to fight it even though I don't really want to spend the money. I may win, I may lose but I'm not going to give in to extortion without a fight.

[Skeezer]

Originally posted by Boojer
Unless you plan to settle ignore the letter. If you have an attorney respond to the letter and don't settle as I did you will get a summons anyway. If you ignore the summons then you have a major problem. My summons took about seven months to show up. I'm going to fight it even though I don't really want to spend the money. I may win, I may lose but I'm not going to give in to extortion without a fight.

Lets talk about extortion for a minute shall we. First off I played
the game better then some and not as well as others, if you received a letter then odds are you intended to hack a copywrited DTV access card. Intent is a powerful word in the legal (world), having first hand experience with it myself. I suggest most of you quit bitching and educate your self a bit. I know when you’re in a Federal Court House in front of a Federal judge you'll feel about two inches tall and helpless... Extortion is illegal first off to use it to describe the legal action(s) against some of you is funny as hell because you rolled the dice and came up with snake eyes and now want to cry about it... First thing you do is consult an attorney and then be his assistant paralegal and do as much research as you can because odds are 98% of the attorneys out there have not dealt with a DMCA case.
Do not take anything to do with the DMCA lightly weather its DTV, down loading movies, music etc. TTRK has said in this forum a 1000 times you ignore the letter you will get sued on a blanket suit, this is for real if and when some of you receive a letter don't F U C K around and waste time. Advice is very important and goes hand in hand with common sense do not go into a court room unprepared, you’re fighting a monster that is well schooled on the DMCA, you'll get your ass whooped. 99.9% think it's just TV no biggy well Dave thinks it's a big deal a very big deal...
Peace

[Taylormade]

Ah men
thanks ske thats well put.period

[Boojer]

SKE. Obviously you missed my point. If you have no plans to settle then hiring an attorney to tell DTV that will cost $2K or better and will still result in a summons. If you plan to settle than by all means have an attorney respond and work out a settlement. I have done my research for my attorney and he feels that if more folks fight them sooner or later DTV will lose a case or two and will set a precedent. I find it interesting in your statement that the letter from DTV is evidence of intent, they still need evidence don't they? By your logic if you recieved a letter this proves your intent so you should settle. Is this really what you meant? I also noted that the statutes DTV is using on my summons are 47 USC 605 which is the FCC act of 1934, and USC 2510-2521 which are federal wiretap laws. The DMCA is not mentioned anywhere on the summons.

[ELF-CO]

Originally posted by Boojer
If you have no plans to settle then hiring an attorney to tell DTV that will cost $2K or better and will still result in a summons.Still don’t know your point for this statement… since plenty of people have received summons without hiring an attorney to respond. By your strategy, there can be only 2 outcomes.
a) Either DTV decides not to pursue with their lawsuit (which is not likely), or
b) you will receive a summons anyway, and you will have lost some valuable time that you could have used to have your attorney investigate on your behalf. In addition, the window of opportunity for a possible smaller settlement may have been lost as well…

If you plan to fight them regardless, it makes far more sense to hire an attorney as soon as possible for (at a minimum) a consultation. It is difficult to combat a team of corporate lawyers to begin with… and your lawyer will need the time to build your defense, assuming you even have one worthy of defending. (Hopefully, nobody here is going to be foolish enough to think they can defend themselves without an attorney!)

I sill cannot see the harm in contacting an attorney first, regardless of what you decide to do next. Many lawyers will do an initial consultation for little or no money.If you plan to settle than by all means have an attorney respond and work out a settlement.I agree.I have done my research for my attorney and he feels that if more folks fight them sooner or later DTV will lose a case or two and will set a precedent.This is rudimentary mathematics. (Fundamental laws of probability and averages) Obviously, it is far more likely that if they launch 10,000 lawsuits, they are more likely to lose at least one, in comparison to if they had only launched 10 lawsuits. But your lawyer would not be doing you justice by telling you that it could set a “precedent”. The mere losing of a case does not do this… it is more like “wishful thinking”. It is far more likely that when a case is lost by them, it is because an irreversible error occurred during trial, or some other mishap. (Far too many to list here). It is highly unlikely that such a mishap (which is typically a unique occurrence) would result in a precedent, or model for all future cases of similar makeup. Webster’s defines precedent as “something done or said that may serve as an example or rule to authorize or justify a subsequent act of the same or an analogous kind”. That being said… it would be outstanding to have some precedent set that puts an end to all current and future lawsuits… but I would certainly not gamble large sums of money at that sort of wishful thinking. Just like gambling, the odds are not in your favor… I find it interesting in your statement that the letter from DTV is evidence of intent, they still need evidence don't they?Do you think they don’t have any evidence? Only way of knowing for certain is by having them show their hand, which they will not do completely until you are going through the court process. (Discovery, etc.) Hopefully, one would have an attorney representing them by this point. Knowing when to hold them, and knowing when to fold them is up to the individual on a case by case basis.By your logic if you recieved a letter this proves your intent so you should settle. Is this really what you meant?I doubt it. I suspect he meant the initial purchase of the equipment, software, or services were the grounds for “intent”. With little exception, that would be accurate.I also noted that the statutes DTV is using on my summons are 47 USC 605 which is the FCC act of 1934, and USC 2510-2521 which are federal wiretap laws. The DMCA is not mentioned anywhere on the summons.Not everyone’s case is identical, which is another example why an attorney’s consultation is so important. Has your lawyer told you his/her speculation as to why your summons did not include a DMCA violation?

[Skeezer]

Originally posted by Boojer
SKE. Obviously you missed my point. If you have no plans to settle then hiring an attorney to tell DTV that will cost $2K or better and will still result in a summons. If you plan to settle than by all means have an attorney respond and work out a settlement. I have done my research for my attorney and he feels that if more folks fight them sooner or later DTV will lose a case or two and will set a precedent. I find it interesting in your statement that the letter from DTV is evidence of intent, they still need evidence don't they? By your logic if you recieved a letter this proves your intent so you should settle. Is this really what you meant? I also noted that the statutes DTV is using on my summons are 47 USC 605 which is the FCC act of 1934, and USC 2510-2521 which are federal wiretap laws. The DMCA is not mentioned anywhere on the summons.

If you plan to settle then why pay an attorney it's in black and white. If you do settle you had best leave the testing community behind as far as personal testing goes. If you plan to go to court
here's another problem and do NOT answer this in public tell your attorney. Have you EVER used the device to program a DTV access card?
Weather to clean, clone, unloop etc. even for educational purposes. The typical answer is yes once or twice. Intent is all they have right now due to the ISO device purchased. I'm not saying give in and settle however until you get to discovery you’re in the dark other then the letter and or summons. Let’s talk about title 47 sec 605 this is where it gets ugly read it twice. Look closely at the word encrypted and marketing system is established i.e. DTV. I'm not here to pick on anyone trying to win your own case just trying to shed some light on what you may be up against. I can't get in to my personal ordeal I went through how ever it took two attorneys and lots of cash. Remember if you receive a summons in civil court or even indicted on charges there still alleged until the final out come, what ever that may be...
If you have NEVER and I mean NEVER tried to program an access card then you should do well. If you have do NOT mess around and try to BS. your way out of it. Let’s say you’re not a legit subscriber and did get the letter for having bought an ISO device and there is a dish on the side your home you can argue the dish was already there the purchase of the ISO device is another story. So weigh out your own facts and decide which avenue you want to go down... Most of the legal information in this forum is Canadian Law . I been to US Federal court and thought I’d share to some of you what you may be up against. There will be some of you who have never tried to program and or even possessed a legal\illegal ISO device to pirate an encrypted signal, those of you can win now it's a matter of can you afford to fight it. Those are the people who get the shaft for letting a friend use a CC card and or use of address then the friend moved away etc. I'm no saint so in my opinion if you received a letter
chances are you did commit piracy, do not take this to court then lose
and or want to settle knowing your may not win. Think out every move you plan on making carefully i.e. contact an attorney the day after you receive the letter , be truthful with him\her etc.

PS.
Boojer If you have ever programmed a access card and take this to court, I hope your attorney has had many years of expierence in our Federal court system not to mention it could run you up to 100K. There will be thousands of interested people watching your out come...

ELF-CO has made excellent points. Boojer I get the feeling you had used the device and think that there is no proof of it, do not think for one minute their that naive. The civil charges you posted carry 5 years in prison everyone needs to take this seriously if you have received a letter and do not plan to settle. Wait until they possibly
show you your moniker and posts you made it happens all the time...
Peace


TITLE 47 > CHAPTER 5 > SUBCHAPTER VI > Sec. 605. Prev | Next
Sec. 605. - Unauthorized publication or use of communications


(a) Practices prohibited



Except as authorized by chapter 119, title 18, no person receiving, assisting in receiving, transmitting, or assisting in transmitting, any interstate or foreign communication by wire or radio shall divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning thereof, except through authorized channels of transmission or reception,

(1)

to any person other than the addressee, his agent, or attorney,

(2)

to a person employed or authorized to forward such communication to its destination,

(3)

to proper accounting or distributing officers of the various communicating centers over which the communication may be passed,

(4)

to the master of a ship under whom he is serving,

(5)

in response to a subpena issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, or

(6)

on demand of other lawful authority. No person not being authorized by the sender shall intercept any radio communication and divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such intercepted communication to any person. No person not being entitled thereto shall receive or assist in receiving any interstate or foreign communication by radio and use such communication (or any information therein contained) for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto. No person having received any intercepted radio communication or having become acquainted with the contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such communication (or any part thereof) knowing that such communication was intercepted, shall divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such communication (or any part thereof) or use such communication (or any information therein contained) for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto. This section shall not apply to the receiving, divulging, publishing, or utilizing the contents of any radio communication which is transmitted by any station for the use of the general public, which relates to ships, aircraft, vehicles, or persons in distress, or which is transmitted by an amateur radio station operator or by a citizens band radio operator.

(b) Exceptions



The provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to the interception or receipt by any individual, or the assisting (including the manufacture or sale) of such interception or receipt, of any satellite cable programming for private viewing if -

(1)

the programming involved is not encrypted; and

(2)


(A)

a marketing system is not established under which -

(i)

an agent or agents have been lawfully designated for the purpose of authorizing private viewing by individuals, and

(ii)

such authorization is available to the individual involved from the appropriate agent or agents; or

(B)

a marketing system described in subparagraph (A) is established and the individuals receiving such programming has obtained authorization for private viewing under that system.

(c) Scrambling of Public Broadcasting Service programming



No person shall encrypt or continue to encrypt satellite delivered programs included in the National Program Service of the Public Broadcasting Service and intended for public viewing by retransmission by television broadcast stations; except that as long as at least one unencrypted satellite transmission of any program subject to this subsection is provided, this subsection shall not prohibit additional encrypted satellite transmissions of the same program.

(d) Definitions



For purposes of this section -

(1)

the term ''satellite cable programming'' means video programming which is transmitted via satellite and which is primarily intended for the direct receipt by cable operators for their retransmission to cable subscribers;

(2)

the term ''agent'', with respect to any person, includes an employee of such person;

(3)

the term ''encrypt'', when used with respect to satellite cable programming, means to transmit such programming in a form whereby the aural and visual characteristics (or both) are modified or altered for the purpose of preventing the unauthorized receipt of such programming by persons without authorized equipment which is designed to eliminate the effects of such modification or alteration;

(4)

the term ''private viewing'' means the viewing for private use in an individual's dwelling unit by means of equipment, owned or operated by such individual, capable of receiving satellite cable programming directly from a satellite;

(5)

the term ''private financial gain'' shall not include the gain resulting to any individual for the private use in such individual's dwelling unit of any programming for which the individual has not obtained authorization for that use; and

(6)

the term ''any person aggrieved'' shall include any person with proprietary rights in the intercepted communication by wire or radio, including wholesale or retail distributors of satellite cable programming, and, in the case of a violation of paragraph (4) of subsection (e) of this section, shall also include any person engaged in the lawful manufacture, distribution, or sale of equipment necessary to authorize or receive satellite cable programming.

(e) Penalties; civil actions; remedies; attorney's fees and costs; computation of damages; regulation by State and local authorities


(1)

Any person who willfully violates subsection (a) of this section shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned for not more than 6 months, or both.

(2)

Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section willfully and for purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both, for the first such conviction and shall be fined not more than $100,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for any subsequent conviction.

(3)


(A)

Any person aggrieved by any violation of subsection (a) of this section or paragraph (4) of this subsection may bring a civil action in a United States district court or in any other court of competent jurisdiction.

(B)

The court -

(i)

may grant temporary and final injunctions on such terms as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain violations of subsection (a) of this section;

(ii)

may award damages as described in subparagraph (C); and

(iii)

shall direct the recovery of full costs, including awarding reasonable attorneys' fees to an aggrieved party who prevails.

(C)


(i)

Damages awarded by any court under this section shall be computed, at the election of the aggrieved party, in accordance with either of the following subclauses;

(I)

the party aggrieved may recover the actual damages suffered by him as a result of the violation and any profits of the violator that are attributable to the violation which are not taken into account in computing the actual damages; in determining the violator's profits, the party aggrieved shall be required to prove only the violator's gross revenue, and the violator shall be required to prove his deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the violation; or

(II)

the party aggrieved may recover an award of statutory damages for each violation of subsection (a) of this section involved in the action in a sum of not less than $1,000 or more than $10,000, as the court considers just, and for each violation of paragraph (4) of this subsection involved in the action an aggrieved party may recover statutory damages in a sum not less than $10,000, or more than $100,000, as the court considers just.

(ii)

In any case in which the court finds that the violation was committed willfully and for purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain, the court in its discretion may increase the award of damages, whether actual or statutory, by an amount of not more than $100,000 for each violation of subsection (a) of this section.

(iii)

In any case where the court finds that the violator was not aware and had no reason to believe that his acts constituted a violation of this section, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of damages to a sum of not less than $250.

(4)

Any person who manufactures, assembles, modifies, imports, exports, sells, or distributes any electronic, mechanical, or other device or equipment, knowing or having reason to know that the device or equipment is primarily of assistance in the unauthorized decryption of satellite cable programming, or direct-to-home satellite services, or is intended for any other activity prohibited by subsection (a) of this section, shall be fined not more than $500,000 for each violation, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years for each violation, or both. For purposes of all penalties and remedies established for violations of this paragraph, the prohibited activity established herein as it applies to each such device shall be deemed a separate violation.

(5)

The penalties under this subsection shall be in addition to those prescribed under any other provision of this subchapter.

(6)

Nothing in this subsection shall prevent any State, or political subdivision thereof, from enacting or enforcing any laws with respect to the importation, sale, manufacture, or distribution of equipment by any person with the intent of its use to assist in the interception or receipt of radio communications prohibited by subsection (a) of this section.

(f) Rights, obligations, and liabilities under other laws unaffected



Nothing in this section shall affect any right, obligation, or liability under title 17, any rule, regulation, or order thereunder, or any other applicable Federal, State, or local law.

(g) Universal encryption standard



The Commission shall initiate an inquiry concerning the need for a universal encryption standard that permits decryption of satellite cable programming intended for private viewing. In conducting such inquiry, the Commission shall take into account -

(1)

consumer costs and benefits of any such standard, including consumer investment in equipment in operation;

(2)

incorporation of technological enhancements, including advanced television formats;

(3)

whether any such standard would effectively prevent present and future unauthorized decryption of satellite cable programming;

(4)

the costs and benefits of any such standard on other authorized users of encrypted satellite cable programming, including cable systems and satellite master antenna television systems;

(5)

the effect of any such standard on competition in the manufacture of decryption equipment; and

(6)

the impact of the time delay associated with the Commission procedures necessary for establishment of such standards.

(h) Rulemaking for encryption standard



If the Commission finds, based on the information gathered from the inquiry required by subsection (g) of this section, that a universal encryption standard is necessary and in the public interest, the Commission shall initiate a rulemaking to establish such a standard

[gunsmoke2]

I know when you’re in a Federal Court House in front of a Federal judge you'll feel about two inches tall and helpless...


Ya there is a difference between talking about it versus doing it. I hope nobody thinks they will go into court and lie.


Its very uncomfortable in discovery never mind in court. When I went to court in Canada I didn't deny aything because I thought what I was doing was legal.


If you think what you are doing is legal then you shouldn't have a problem.


GS2

[Dean_M_Love]

Originally posted by gunsmoke2
Ya there is a difference between talking about it versus doing it. I hope nobody thinks they will go into court and lie.


Its very uncomfortable in discovery never mind in court. When I went to court in Canada I didn't deny aything because I thought what I was doing was legal.


If you think what you are doing is legal then you shouldn't have a problem.


GS2

..or worse yet, Judge Judy...

[gunsmoke2]

I rather settle then go in front of her ;)


GS2

[slowpok]

I think the only reason any of this 'dave ----' exists is because dave would really like for you to donate some money.

If you are a crook...you owe Dave.

I have received both letters and I am not a crook. What I bought was not illegal to buy..and I will NEVER in a millions years give in to this kind of pressure.

Nobody has lost at the time of this writting. All of the trial dates never happen. Everything is settled out of court or dropped by Dave.

The only people to loose are the ones that settle.

Settleing is why Dave Is here. And Believe me..beware..he is writting here and he is reading here at this forum everyday...all the time.

[REDx]

time will tell. people like you are
gonna cost others who listen to you
all they have.
anyone who recieves the letter should
contact an attorney.

[ELF-CO]

Originally posted by slowpok
I have received both letters and I am not a crook. What I bought was not illegal to buy..and I will NEVER in a millions years give in to this kind of pressure.Sounds like something Nixon would say… but fine, you are not a crook. Good for you. Just provide us with a docket # or court transcript after you have won your case.
Nobody has lost at the time of this writting. All of the trial dates never happen. Everything is settled out of court or dropped by Dave.Plenty of default judgments have been issued to date. (BTW, these do not go under the “win" column for the end user, in case you are taking another "survey"). And there are PLENTY of court cases pending. Don’t take my word for it… ask your lawyer to do a search for the current records. Just because there hasn’t been a case that has gone completely though the court process does not mean there won’t be.The only people to loose are the ones that settle.I have read all your previous posts, and you are nothing more than another troll spewing the same rhetoric over and over. I have received SPAM that had better advice than anything you have typed here to date. You offer no substance, nothing to back up your claims (except some lame “survey”, like as if it reflects the true numbers out there), and then have the gall to state that anyone doing contrary to you is wrong. How the hell would you know… since, by your own keen sense of observation, not a single case has gone through to trial yet. Anyone that has actual court experience can tell you, going to court isn’t cheap… and you can not predict with 100% certainty what the outcome may be. Those two factors alone are good reasons for the average joe to reconsider the options available. But you say you are innocent… fine. Go prove it in court. Plenty of innocent people lose in court too, every day. Just remember to send us the transcript when it’s all over.Settleing is why Dave Is here. Knowing who your enemy is and what they are up to is why they are here, and every other site. Standard business practice, nothing more. Business 101.And Believe me..beware..he is writting here and he is reading here at this forum everyday...all the time.So? And EVERY other forum too. Again… so? Since that is the case, why would you even admit to the purchase of an item (illegal or not) on an open forum, and them make comments within other postings on how to cross-reference your screen name to other sites? Is this some keen advice your lawyer gave you too, or did you think up this one all on your own? If you don’t have one yet…and if you really are going to court on this issue, you had better get a lawyer quick and start following his/her advice… cause you obviously need it.

[melvin1]

After spending hours reading and reading through the threads I admire and thank all those that have contributed to passing along pertinent information that may be used by individuals. However, some of the opinions have gone to a point where I'm sure if they have merit. My question to anyone is; has DTV successfully taken anyone in the country to Court and sued them and won? If the answer is no, then has DTV taken anybody to court and lost in the country? I believe the answer to the above questions may shed more light on the direction one must take in preparing himself for letters from DTV.

[Skeezer]

Originally posted by melvin1
After spending hours reading and reading through the threads I admire and thank all those that have contributed to passing along pertinent information that may be used by individuals. However, some of the opinions have gone to a point where I'm sure if they have merit. My question to anyone is; has DTV successfully taken anyone in the country to Court and sued them and won? If the answer is no, then has DTV taken anybody to court and lost in the country? I believe the answer to the above questions may shed more light on the direction one must take in preparing himself for letters from DTV.

A few reasons you may be seeing settlements...
1. The end user did in fact use the device purchased.
2. The cost to retain an attorney for a Federal case is more expensive then in state court and not having 100% certainty in the out come plays a role.
3. End user retained an attorney and some disclosure was given as to what evidence will be used in court.

[eeprom7777]

Originally posted by melvin1
...
My question to anyone is; has DTV successfully taken anyone in the country to Court and sued them and won? If the answer is no, then has DTV taken anybody to court and lost in the country? I believe the answer to the above questions may shed more light on the direction one must take in preparing himself for letters from DTV. Originally posted by To The Real King!!
...
Think about it. If this were not the case then why are there NO WINS and NO LOSSES in court. BECAUSE they DROP the ones where they may lose is why or they settle with those that are guilty or are willing to settle to get it over with but either way it does not go to court. Those people are told NOT to post about settlements, especially low ones. http://www.dsschat.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=150144

Hope this helps.

[slowpok]

ELF-CO

You have read all 5 posts and formed an opinion. I have formed an opinion of you also.

If dave isn't paying you than you're getting ripped off.

If you get a summons and don't answer or if you settle you will pay dave.

I will wait for a summons that probably won't come (around 6%) before getting an attorney and fight this extortionist if I do receive one.

There is no evidence that dave is willing to go to court.

This is just an extortionists scheme.

That's my opinion.

[REDx]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by slowpok
ELF-CO
[b]
You have read all 5 posts and formed an opinion. I have formed an opinion of you also.

a good one i hope unlike you he is trying to help others
with real documented facts.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by slowpok
If dave isn't paying you than you're getting ripped off.

how is it a good thing for dtv if people consult a lawyer as
ELF-CO recomends. why would dtv pay him to cause them trouble.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by slowpok
If you get a summons and don't answer or if you settle you will pay dave.

what the hell did you just say. take a deep breath and try again.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by slowpok
I will wait for a summons that probably won't come (around 6%) before getting an attorney and fight this extortionist if I do receive one.

where do you get your info. thats right from a self serveing
servey by some unknown called MAIL424 or something like that.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by slowpok
There is no evidence that dave is willing to go to court.

you do live in a dream word dont you. ever hear of pacer.
there are hundreds of dtv law suits in the courts.


now as far as you are concerned. you are trying to take advantage
of the fear and bad luck of those who recieved letters from dtv.
by saying follow me im the pied piper. ill lead you to a place were
your fears and dtv problems will vanish.
i have one recomendation to those who follow you to this better
place. DONT DRINK THE KOOL-AIDE lol.

[anvil]

Originally posted by REDx
you do live in a dream word dont you. ever hear of pacer.
there are hundreds of dtv law suits in the courts.

It would be more accurate to change hundreds to thousands.

[slowpok]

yes I have a pacer account.

I see all you people here would rather scare each other into settleing

I don't belong here..I'm gone.

[REDx]

Originally posted by anvil
It would be more accurate to change hundreds to thousands.
sorry i was trying to cut the poor confused fellow
some slack lol.

[REDx]

Originally posted by slowpok
yes I have a pacer account.

I see all you people here would rather scare each other into settleing

I don't belong here..I'm gone.
no dont go you are to much fun. you do a
valuable service here. you show people what
can happen when they delude themselves.
remember folks THIS COULD BE YOU.
but if you must go just tap your heels
to gethter 3 times and keep repeating. there
is no place like home - there is no place like
hope. tell the wizard i mean MAIL424 i said high.

[melvin1]

Thanks guys for the feedback. However, there was no definitive answer to the question about anyone going into Court, winning or losing. Therefore, I must assume that their hasn't been any cases that have gone to court. So I must assume most people have settled and or are awaiting a court date.

[ELF-CO]

Originally posted by slowpok
ELF-CO
You have read all 5 posts and formed an opinion. I have formed an opinion of you also. Quantity is not an issue. QUALITY is. The lack of substance in your posts, coupled with the same ‘ol rhetoric of “don’t settle” lead me to believe that either you are merely a sock-puppet for someone else here… where you are from, I.Q. is measured with a dipstick.If dave isn't paying you than you're getting ripped off.I would work for them in a heartbeat if I thought for one second they would pay my current outrageous salary. I’m sure some of their upper management fringe benefits would be enticing.If you get a summons and don't answer or if you settle you will pay dave.Every individual should weigh the pro’s and con’s based on their particular case and financial situation. Some should fight, and should be thankful that settling is even an option. But suggesting that people settling are stupid is wrong, plain and simple. You are not in their particular situation to be a judge of that. That’s reality pal… like it or not.I will wait for a summons that probably won't come (around 6%) before getting an attorney and fight this extortionist if I do receive one.Good for you… basing your decision on some magical number that is completely meaningless in the real world. You wanna gamble on something stupid like that… be my guest. I doubt anyone will change your mind. But when you do receive that summons, you will have to make up all the time you lost on helping your lawyer provide a defense… assuming you can. (Based on your current attitude, I doubt you are gonna help your lawyer much anyway)There is no evidence that dave is willing to go to court.Crawled out of the cave long enough to say this, huh? REDx is correct. If you disagree, then you are just another troll that should go back to the newsgroups where you belong. As if the multitudes of press releases weren’t enough to get the message out… the court documents filed are enough to keep a pulp mill in business for some time to come… yet you disagree. Get a clue…This is just an extortionists scheme.Maybe yes, maybe no… does this mean you shouldn’t seek legal advice either way?That's my opinion.Yep. And worth every penny we paid for it.

[ELF-CO]

Originally posted by melvin1
Thanks guys for the feedback. However, there was no definitive answer to the question about anyone going into Court, winning or losing. Therefore, I must assume that their hasn't been any cases that have gone to court. So I must assume most people have settled and or are awaiting a court date. This HAS been mentioned within this very forum several times. To date, no case (on this issue) has gone completely through the court system. (I am not including default judgements here) However, plenty are pending... and yes, most have settled, or are awaiting the discovery process, etc.

[slowpok]

ELF-CO

Man are you a cool dude... I just popped in to see that you took soooo much time out of your oh so money making days to answer my posts so completely.

You talk of lack of substance in my posts...fear in yours does not make substance.
Oh yea, don't compare your IQ or money.

I believe you, unlike myself, do work for someone else. There's no problem there except I would not at all be surprised if it were our buddy Dave.

You seem to jump in my ---- when I suggest people should have courage to fight these bastards. You seem to have an agenda here...maybe you chickened out and gave them money...too bad.
There are people innoccent here...you are evidently not one.

There is nothing wrong with defending yourself as I have suggested, but if you really cool dudes want to sweat and write here together...that's just fine.


Also...remember if you have to tell people how much money you make and how smart you are than it looks to most of us that you have had problems in these areas. This may be also an embarrassment to you. Don't fret..we are all in this together.
We can deal with poor stupid people.

Lotsaluck....slowpok

[slowpok]

dito

[megados]

Ok that's enough bashing, and flaming.

Play nice you guys or there's gonna be some additions to the Reading club.

[slowpok]

megados

Sorry,

I don't mean to be hard to get along with but most everything that these people claim as truth has now disolved in May here as the 2 year limit for white viper is coming to a close.

Has DSSWARE gone down? I can't seem to get in touch with this sight anymore.

[Lager]

Yeah it has gone down. Check your pm.

Lager

[slowpok]

Dave....I mean redx, or are you guys the same?...and I mean guys! You are dave and it's very evident. I hope you have not screwed too many people up so far. It's time to stop your bull----....now that everyone knows. You are out of a job buddy...not that you really had one...ha

[tcan]

I doubt anyone will change your mind. But when you do receive that summons, you will have to make up all the time you lost on helping your lawyer provide a defense… assuming you can

Elf-Co: This theme that the suit MUST proceed per Dave's time-table is nonsense. Those that are going to defend themselves, before a Jury, need time to prepare... the Court MUST provide the defense reasonable time...The suggestion that dave can “Rail Road” the suit is not a legal opinion but sure is a scare tactic. You only need a lawyer when you are sued, unless you intend to settle.

[slowpok]

REDx..I denied reciept of your pm...anything you have to say can be said right out here where everyone's watching.

[ELF-CO]

Originally posted by tcan
Elf-Co: This theme that the suit MUST proceed per Dave's time-table is nonsense.And when did I say that? You quote me, then try and interpret what was said to this… which is nonsense.Those that are going to defend themselves, before a Jury, need time to prepare... the Court MUST provide the defense reasonable time...Duh. This is built into the legal system as it stands right now. No need to point out the obvious and nobody to my knowledge has stated otherwise.

All “I” mentioned (like what you quoted, for example), is that you are put on notice when you receive a letter… and the time between your letter and summons could certainly be better spent consulting with an attorney, and building a defense. If you think it’s a waste of time to consult with an attorney until you actually receive a summons… then that’s YOUR opinion. Doesn’t mean it’s a good one. Being pro-active, rather than reactive is typically a better approach.The suggestion that dave can “Rail Road” the suit is not a legal opinion but sure is a scare tactic.I have no idea what you are trying to point out with this statement at all.You only need a lawyer when you are sued, unless you intend to settle. That’s a pretty poor statement. That’s like saying you do not need a dentist until you have a cavity. Everyone here knows that unless DTV decides to forget about you (which is quite unlikely), you really only have two choices… settle, or go to court. By your own statement, you need a lawyer for both… so why wait and waste time that could have been better spent? Again, it doesn’t make much sense.

[REDx]

Originally posted by slowpok
REDx..I denied reciept of your pm...anything you have to say can be said right out here where everyone's watching.

you sir before were just a lame little clown.
you are now a liar i didnt send you a pm.
anyone who follows your advice desevers what
they get. you are a troll of the worst kind.
all anyone needs to do is a search of your
posts to see you dont have a clue.
i thought you said you had left this forum
another lie i guess.