Former anti-piracy 'bag man' turns on DirecTV

[samson25]

Sounds like Dave is in a bit of hot water now that an 'insider' is suing them. I am sure a lot more of their extortion tactics will come out in this trial. A jury will favor a working class plaintiff more than a huge, greedy corporation as long as the lawyer presents the case correctly. We'll have to see if Dave offers an out of court settlement to keep their tactics secret.

Dont really think DTV is in to much trouble. Gov sides with most big companies because they make a lot of money and pay a lot of taxes. Untill a circuit judge gets one of thoose letters it will be business as usual. Look at microsoft and all the crap they do and get away with. Microsoft is worse than DTV and going stronger than ever

[samson25]

Okay, I am only a first year law school student but allow me to point out a few things. 1st and most importantly in order for a case to go to court it most be demed legit by a judge before it goes to trial. Now if you look at the article you will see a pattern.

1st case) "In 2002, he sued the company for extortion on behalf of seven clients who claimed to have ordered smart card programmers and other equipment for legitimate purposes, and subsequently received DirecTV's threatening letter. But last year a county judge ruled that DirecTV's mailings were connected with litigation." (Judge threw out the case, never made it to trial)

2nd case) "Undeterred, Wilens filed a federal lawsuit in Los Angeles under the mob-busting Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) organized crime statute, again claiming extortion. A federal judge dismissed that case as well, using similar reasoning as the county judge" (judge threw out case again)

3rd case) "In March, Wilens filed another, nearly-identical RICO suit in Colorado, where he says case law is more favorable. He followed that up with the Fisher suit, and a separate lawsuit accusing the company of violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act " This is bad. Weins is shopping the case which is not a good thing for the credibility of the case. Judges frown on this as it makes them look suspect.

You also need to realize that when the judge reviews whether to allow this case he will review the two past cases and the possible outcome of allowing the case. The judges comments in those past cases will sway his opinion in the current case. Judges dont like over turning other judges decisions. Hence the concept of case law.

As for your comments on MS you totally leave out the fact that the suits being filled are not by a few individuals with a few dollars and a local small attorney. The MS cases are filled by big companies with money, often lots of money and multiple attorneys. The case in europe I believe it was where they lost was not a average joe but large companies teaming together if I remember correctly. Its money and power fighting each other. The small guy that wins in the movies is extremely extremely rare, why do you think they get made into movies. Cause it almost never hapens. It takes a lot of money and time to beat a big company something the average guy or few guys dont have. It takes legal teams with lots of money backing them dedicated to winning. When that suit happens then you may be able to talk class action. Untill then you are dreaming. Unless he finds that lucky judge eventually.

I love debate and dont take it personal so if you believe I am wrong please post how and where.

[yeahright]

Your wrong...and it's because...
This time around.. there is a history of extortion tactics by DTV. He has in his possesion signatures and letters from individuals that were hurt by DTVs campaign of "pay up know or get sued". There are many cases and many of these were guilty and some not...That with the counter suit from these individuals goes to proof that DTV was up to something.. There is no negating that. It makes his case stronger. Any decent lawyer could win a DTV case in court. It cost money to do it..DTV figures that most poeple won't put up a fight.. that was their mistake. According to what DTV was pursueing..they wanted to market and outlaw smartcard technology for themselves..they even took the inventor of it to court..and lost....I think they are appealing. They can't stop this technology because there are many uses for it. My brother is in the military.. He walks around with a P3 card in his wallet. It has in it..all his medical records. With it he can go to any hospital and they will have his information on the spot..blood type, allergies.. ETC....

I believe DTV has a big problem on there hands.. They always have been known to have poor customer service... the worst ever... Now that someone they hired that was a former detective..knows all the insides of the workings...is a big threat to them...they will do everthing they can get out of this one.

[samson25]

Unfortunately there is not much of a response to be made to the last post, but i will do my best. Let me clarify that I dont like DTV or there practices, just trying to stop false hopes.

You stated there is a history of extortion tactics. However as I already showed in my last post Both suits filled on that concept were thrown out of court. His (rico) suit was based on the extortion view and it was thrown out. Two judges did not even deem them worthy to go to trial, and now he is shopping the case. That says a lot, more than i think you understand about its credibility. Stop thinking the good guy wins in the court. IT DOESNT HAPPEN, or it is a rare thing. Thats why movies get made about it. Look at freakin OJ for christ sake. The justice system has unfortuanetly turned into who has more money and assets. There are many things that are done to prevent the case from making it to trial. They can stall and do many things that start costing money and wear down the opposition. Look I am not saying it is impossible for DTV to loose this one, anything is possible. I am just saying dont get to excited. It will be a long war if it does come to pass. With a few small victories here and there to build the way for a bigger suit. This goes back to case law comment I made. Judges review past cases and base decisions on them. If you start getting small victories the attorney will point to thoose cases to help them and show a basis for there case. However they are 0 for 2 and its setting a pattern that other judges will follow.