Message to certain Canadians

[foxbro]

have info for some Canadian's legal future.
need to PM or EM interested parties.
will send to any email address if the respond posts are from the right parties.
will delete or edit this message shortly.

[gunsmoke2]

Why do you have to be so mysterious and who are the right parties..

You can PM anyone you choose to... Also could not find your post in DSS General..

GS2



[Edited by gunsmoke2 on September 10th, 2000 at 04:21 PM]

[foxbro]

DIRECTV, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff,


v.


REGINALD SCULLION, a foreign national d/b/a VCIPHER TECHNOLOGIES and R&R SOFTWARE; FRANCES CALLAN, a foreign national; and AVANTEC WIZPOPPITZ, INC., a foreign corporation; and JOHN DOES 1-10, Defendants


DIRECTV, Inc. v. Reggie Scullion, et al., No. CV-99-05803 (United States District Court, Central District of California)

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Foxbro,

Yes I am aware of this investigation of me. I do not have a copy of the letter however and I would be interested in getting it. I thought it was mostly by telephone call which it was in some instances. I was not aware of a letter. In most cases I have been made aware of, the people have NOT answered at all as they have no obligation to. US citizens may use test card so long as they are used OUTSIDE the United States and they were always made aware of this fact on my web site.

The ONLY reason for this is to TRY to ascertain the amount of DAMAGES against me in the lawsuit that went undefended in Washington State court. I will be bringing a suit to refute that suit which is of course invalid here. There is NO RECIPROCITY between Quebec and Washington state. Make no mistake, that is ALL it is about, nothing more.

I received a document from Patti Rice, Yarmuth, Wilsdon Calfo PLLC of 1201 Third Ave., 3080, Seattle, Washington 98101-3000 Just last week. The letter states that they will be presenting evidence to the court of their “damages”. Sure!!

Please fax it to the Legal-rights organization at 1-450-451-6477 and I will get a copy of it.

One of the interesting things, something I intend to bring out in court evidence, is WHERE Wilsdon or DirecTV ‘s lawyers got the names of the people they sent this to.

If they got it from the Canadian RCMP then that is illegal in Canada and CRIMINAL CHARGES will be brought against the RCMP. I see no other method that they could get my property (my customer list) so they (DirecTV‘s lawyers whom I will subpoena if necessary) will have to inform the court of this. If they will NOT appear in Canada, that may affect civil cases between us.

If there is ANY name on it, I have no problem if the name is “whited out” but I would appreciate receiving a fax or scanned copy as soon a s possible. You can PM me (haven’t checked those in days but will do so) or e-mail a scan to me at ttrk@legal-rights.org.

I appreciate your help in this serious matter involving potential and suspected crimes by the RCMP and my investigation of them. It will be VERY complete I assure you.

Of interest is the new “TABLE OF RULINGS FOR US AND AGAINST US” that I have just posted at:

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

You may find that interesting :)

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

To The REAL King!!
-----------------------


[Edited by To The Real King!! on September 10th, 2000 at 07:49 PM]

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Geo,

Please understand that the truth about Discount Satellite was never told, unfortunately. Folks here may well have been mislead on this. He actually abandoned the case IN ALBERTA and so a default judgement was issued there as well. Had he fought the point he would have had no difficulty requiring them to “start all over.” But for reasons unknown (I only speculate that he didn’t care and they actually got very little) he did nothing at all and CHOSE to do that.

In Quebec the jurisdiction of a foreign court such as in Washington will ONLY be accepted if there is reciprocity, that is if Washington would enforce a local judgement, which they do not. So should they try to exercise it, they will be compelled, through a court action by my lawyers, to RETRY the entire case in a Quebec court. I look FORWARD to that as they are VERY difficult to get answers from in a Canadian court. They will have VERY MUCH to answer if they come here. Like why did they manufacture 13 million Hcards for 5 million subscribers, for instance?

We have asked about 30 questions concerning contractual matters that were unanswered (relating to the relationship of NDS and DirecTV®) and how for instance, the cards that they assert belong to NDS could be SOLD by DirecTV® for which we have invoices of sale etc.) of their VP Ms. Theresa Ferguson when she testified here. She undertook to get answers but never did. I don’t expect she EVER will either. The farce of her testimony and her very limited knowledge of anything else other than her limited agenda (which was to try to convict me) in THIS court has now been revealed. She is NOT appreciated as being of any assistance to the local court and her purpose in testifying at the crowns request was REALIZED and commented on by the Judge The same thing happened in another Court some 3 months later when her testimony at my hearing was revealed. That judge got EXTREMELY annoyed that no information had been received in view of the undertakings of both her and Geoffery kilfoyle of NDS.

DirecTV® will have to retry the whole case locally in order to get a new judgement which would be executable. Seeing the court in BC has clarified that there is no offence and as my previous company had extensive disclaimers specifically addressed to US users or those in ANY OTHER jurisdiction similar to the following approx.:

http://www.vcipher.com/warning.html

and

http://www.vcipher.com/disclaimer.html

You can see from these that they are rather complete and will satisfy our obligation to advise US customers that they must NOT use the product within the USA. This “due dilligence “ is REQUIRED under our law. Naturally they may use it at their Vacation home in Costa Rica, the Bahamas, Mexico or any of the 50 or more jurisdictions where usage is perfectly legal. As the product was delivered by Fedex who acted as the clients agent and was paid for by him, its reception for transportation to another jurisdiction for use is not against the law if the client took care to have that usage provable by him. If the client used it illegally (which I seriously doubt) then HE would be committing an illegal act if he used the product at some later date, to defraud DirecTV® or anyone of a lawful fee that they were entitled to. I NEVER went to the US and have absolutely NO EVIDENCE that this EVER happened. We did sometimes REFUSE SALE to persons who implied illegal usage and I have the PROOF of that.

USAGE in the USA is illegal (or in any part of the USA where DTV has a license to operate and has not granted that right to NRTC or some other entity) and as I sold ONLY in Canada, the local courts would be very unlikely to find that I did not do my “due diligence” as required under our law. My “due dilligence” as required by our law is QUITE CLEAR and NON AMBIGUOUS which is what is required of me under Canadian law.

Further there is a ruling in the BC Supreme court (not the CanAm one) but rather the ”Brainteck” ruling that specifically finds that NO LIABILITY accrues to any Canadian web site when they clearly state the terms of usage of a product. They reasoned that because the WWW is World Wide, Canadians cannot be expected to know the law in every jurisdiction so they can ONLY be held liable when the alleged offence is ALSO an offence under Canadian Law. That is that they COULD HAVE BEEN prosecuted here in Canada for the action. Recent case law shows clearly that it is not an offence in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada was asked for leave to appeal to them on this case and they stated that they agreed with the Supreme Court of BC and the BC Appeals court, thus RATIFYING this ruling. It is now LAW in Canada and a Supreme Court of Canada ruling applying throughout Canada.

But DirecTV® may have to come to Canada for a different reason. I intend to take a class action lawsuit on behalf of all Canadians because DirecTV® have now been stated by three courts in Canada to be the ones doing the unlawful thing. They sell “grey market” into Canada through the artiface of US postal boxes (and I have many Canadians who will testify that DTV authorized them in the US while having full knowledge that they were really Canadian) in Canada without paying the required GST and PST (two federal and provincial taxes that apply to all transactions). In addition to beating our government and therefore the people of Canada out of those taxes, they do NOT pay copyright fees for distribution in Canada nor the required 5% of sales to the government production fund that must be paid for all broadcasters in Canada. Naturally they also beat the Government out of INCOME TAX on all the funds they earn as a result of these ”illegal” sales and transactions on some 300 million yearly. Thats quite a sum. There is MUCH more to this that what I am explaining (and I do NOT intend to go further) but the BEST feature is that General Motor (who DirecTV® is a part of under their GMH shares on the New York Stock exchange) have LOTS of assets in Canada and so CAN readily be collected against should judgement be obtained in our courts. They have SEVERAL automobile plants in Canada (and ONE in Quebec) and LAWYERS LOVE defendants who can be collected from ESPECIALLY when their illegal action is as clear as it is in THIS case. We have ABSOLUTE PROOF that their actions were methodical and purposful and intended to defeat the Canadian and US laws both which prohibit them from doing this. This has been discussed at length with several civil lawyers and they have expressed extreme interest. And acting for the “people of Canada” is also a somewhat NOBLE act, one that is looked on favorably by everyone, especially lawyers who cherish reputations.

Things will definitely get more interesting before they get a hearing of any kind.


Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!
-----------------------
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!

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





[Edited by To The Real King!! on September 11th, 2000 at 02:54 AM]

[gunsmoke2]

Hi foxbro,

Just got back from out of town..

Yes I know all about that.. I have this friend who mentioned it in passing.. :)

GS2

[nimiq]

Ahh! You scared foxbro away.

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Folks,

Yes I am surprised that foxboro has not come back and has not faxed the letter to legal rights. If ANYBODY has the letter, please white out the name and fax it.

Just to advise everyone, the Police in the stated did 60 RAIDS on Vcipher customers in the US and got NOTHING. They seem hard headed and do not realize that most US customers received these cards for use in LEGAL jurisdictions. So they wont find them in the US and they wont find damages.

This issue of an “Amnesty” is largely a bluff designed to make people “self-incriminate” and while some folds will be “bamboozled,” very few will be.

Personally I think the whole thing is laughable. An undefended court case in a jurisdiction 4,000 miles away and at the same time that I am undergoing criminal procedures here in Canada and could NOT attend. Then an amnesty letter trying to BUY peoples testimony against me for damages.

They must have unlimited money for this and in the end, I believe they will have to prove a case here in Canada where it WILL be defended and they wont be able to say anything they want.

That’s when the truth of the matter will come out. And people who accept their amnesty will have to testify and answer WHY they purchased product and what their intent was when they did that. Otherwise the “amnesty” will be quite hollow :)

So if you are not using the letter ”for toilet paper” please fax me a copy to 1-450-451-0954 as I would love to see it.


Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!
-----------------------
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!

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

[gunsmoke2]

Oh.. he abandoned it.. thats good for future cases..

Does that mean that the rumored unpaid lawyers bills are ?

GS2

[english]

I am not too sure he adandoned the case.

In a Supreme Court Press release at http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/com/2000/html/2k-04-13.3.html it says 27629 DAVID DAWSON, DISCOUNT SATELLITE and ASAP PRINTING - v. - THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ALBERTA ON BEHALF OF HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (Alta.)

CORAM: Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.


The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.


La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.



So it appears as if the decision not to grant an appeal by the Court of Appeal in Alberta was not granted leave to appeal by the Supreme Court of Canada. So he exhausted all legal avenues in Canada and was forced to give up the fight as the Supreme Court refused to hear his case.


[Edited by english on September 20th, 2000 at 10:22 AM]

[To The Real King!!]

Hi English,

No that’s not the same issue at all, this Supreme court thing was a request to appeal a criminal decision FROM the Appeals court in Alberta. The (CRIM) in brackets in the decision tells you that.

The store and all of the assets that were seized pursuant to a CIVIL COURT ruling that DirecTV® got in Washington and was undefended by Discount for obvious reasons. DirecTV® are very good at getting rulings when they are undefended.

When THAT ruling was presented to the Alberta court system for execution. THAT is when he did not fight the issue fully. As there is no reciprocity between Alberta and Washington state DirecTV® would have had to start all over with the suit in Alberta had he been properly represented on the Alberta court. This is quite common and Alberta would NOT have executed the judgement had that been properly stated or pleaded to the court.

Even if they decided against in the lower court it could have been appealed and was NOT. At that point he abandoned the fight and capitulated to the judgement not further arguing it.

So what I stated initially IS THE CORRECT ANSWER.

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!
-----------------------
Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!

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


Newbies PLEASE CLICK HERE and Read (http://www.dsschat.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=26)


[Edited by To The Real King!! on September 20th, 2000 at 12:51 PM]