Crap !!!!

[beercan22]

Well.........I just got my letter from DirecTV today. Did anyone else get one of these? They say they want the old loaders, sign an agreement to not steal any more sat signals and around $3,500.00 or go to court. Has anyone setteled with them before? Any suggestions on what to do or where to go for help?
Thanks,
Beercan :cry:

[BirdieMod]

There is quite alot of stuff posted in the legal section on the issue. Did you here what or where they got your info, Site? etc?
I thought I had heard they were losing against individuals and were moving to going after the bigger fish now.

Also what era stuff, H card? I heard easybuy rolled over and narced alot of people out.

[beercan22]

There is quite alot of stuff posted in the legal section on the issue. Did you here what or where they got your info, Site? etc?
I thought I had heard they were losing against individuals and were moving to going after the bigger fish now.

Also what era stuff, H card? I heard easybuy rolled over and narced alot of people out.

It was for the HU card. Got the stuff three or four years ago. I haven't called DTV yet so I don't know what they have. Have to be careful when you talk to them. Don't want to agree too early to the settelment request without finding out what others have gone thru. Thanks for your help, BirdieMod !
Beercan

[4x4]

Well.........I just got my letter from DirecTV today. Did anyone else get one of these? They say they want the old loaders, sign an agreement to not steal any more sat signals and around $3,500.00 or go to court. Has anyone setteled with them before? Any suggestions on what to do or where to go for help?
Thanks,
Beercan :cry:

Was it a registered letter , did you have to sign for it ????

[beercan22]

Was it a registered letter , did you have to sign for it ????

Nope. Just a plain, letter sized, brown envelope from DTV - End User Development Group - El Segundo, CA.

[gunther]

Nope. Just a plain, letter sized, brown envelope from DTV - End User Development Group - El Segundo, CA.

Then it's just phishing for easy targets.

Put it in the bottom of your birdcage and forget it.

Until someone walks up to and says "You've been served" it's all jut posturing. They simply don't have the resources to go after everyone they send letters too.

[mmst5]

I had one 3 0r 4 years ago, I ignore it, then they send me another one I ignore it also, never heard from them again

[beercan22]

Then it's just phishing for easy targets.

Put it in the bottom of your birdcage and forget it.

Until someone walks up to and says "You've been served" it's all jut posturing. They simply don't have the resources to go after everyone they send letters too.


The letter has a case number on it and says to contact them by Oct. 8th or they will take it to court.

[4x4]

I would say to just leave it be , they usually send a restiered letter ...
I have heard of that " End User " letter before but nobody ever complained back ???

[LuckLarry]

Nope. Just a plain, letter sized, brown envelope from DTV - End User Development Group - El Segundo, CA.



Wipe you ass with it and through it away. Not registered mail, then you never received it. Wait for a summons to appear before you worry.

[JCK7]

HERE what dtv said in june . WATE them out . JCK7
THIS WAS IN PAPER

June 15, 2004

I just got this from the Electronic Frontier Foundation regarding DirecTV's legal activities against suspected satellite TV pirates.

The crux of this release comes in paragraph 5:

"The company will no longer pursue people solely for purchasing smart card readers, writers, general-purpose programmers, and general-purpose emulators."

Here's the release:

###

After discussions with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Center for Internet and Society (CIS) Cyberlaw Clinic, satellite television giant DirecTV has agreed to modify its nationwide campaign against signal piracy in order to reduce threats and lawsuits against innocent users of smart card technology. Chief among these changes is a promise to no longer sue or threaten to sue people merely for possessing smart card devices.

"American innovators and hobbyists shouldn't have to fear legal action merely for possessing new technologies that have many legitimate uses," said EFF Staff Attorney Jason Schultz. "We're also pleased that DirecTV has agreed to stop targeting general purpose devices in its campaign and will investigate all substantive claims of innocence."

Over the past few years, DirecTV has orchestrated a nationwide legal campaign against hundreds of thousands of individuals, claiming that they were illegally intercepting its satellite TV signal. The company began its crusade by raiding smart card device distributors to obtain their customer lists, then sent over 170,000 demand letters to customers and eventually filed more than 24,000 federal lawsuits against them. Because DirecTV made little effort to distinguish legal uses of smart card technology from illegal ones, EFF and the CIS Cyberlaw Clinic received hundreds of calls and emails from panicked device purchasers.

In August 2003, EFF and CIS created the DirecTV Defense website to provide innocent users and their lawyers with the information necessary to defend themselves. The organizations also began a series of discussions with DirecTV about ways to reform its anti-piracy tactics and protect innocent consumers.

As a result, DirecTV has agreed to make several changes to its campaign. The company will no longer pursue people solely for purchasing smart card readers, writers, general-purpose programmers, and general-purpose emulators. It will maintain this policy into the forseeable future and file lawsuits only against people it suspects of actually pirating its satellite signal. DirecTV will, however, continue to investigate purchasers of devices that are often primarily designed for satellite signal interception, nicknamed "bootloaders" and "unloopers."

DirecTV also agreed to change its pre-lawsuit demand letters to explain in detail how innocent recipients can get DirecTV to drop their cases. The company also promised that it will investigate every substantive claim of innocence it receives. If purchasers provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that they did not use their devices for signal theft, DirecTV will dismiss their cases. EFF and CIS will monitor reports of this process to confirm that innocent device purchasers are having their cases dismissed.

"While EFF still disagrees with DirecTV over other aspects of its campaign, we're pleased that we could find mutual ground on these issues," said CIS Executive Director Jennifer Granick, who represented EFF in the negotiations. "We hope to continue working with DirecTV to resolve the remaining disputes so that everyone can enjoy the benefits of smart card technology."

Smart card readers and their various derivatives have many legitimate uses, including computer security and scientific research.

DirecTV Defense website

==============================================

Court Tells DirecTV To Stop Extortion Plan One Day Later

It's beginning to sound like it wasn't so much the EFF's persuasive words that convinced DirecTV to stop suing people just for owning smartcard equipment. Just one day after that announcement was made, a judge has told the satellite TV company that they can no longer sue just for possession if they have no proof that the person actually did anything wrong with the equipment. It certainly took the courts long enough to come to that conclusion, causing problems for plenty of people who were wrongfully sued. In the meantime, this ruling makes you think that DirecTV already knew it was coming when they made their little "promise" to the EFF yesterday.

This is great news for people who have gotten letters. Basically, the 11th ciruit court ruled on appeal yesterday that DTV cannot sue someone for mere possession. That the readers/writers have many uses. They must prove interception of signal. One suggestion was that DTV concentrate on securing there signal better than allowing a 35.00 unit to hack it............

[beercan22]

I would say to just leave it be , they usually send a restiered letter ...
I have heard of that " End User " letter before but nobody ever complained back ???

I may scan the letter and post it here for you guys to take a look at it (without my name of course) and see what you think. Thanks to all for your support. It kinda freaked me out today.
Beercan

[bols2dawaLL]

I dont get it . How the hell could they prove anything . So you bought a loader.BFD. Wouldn't they need to "prove" that you actually used it to steal there service ? :snipersmi

[JT]

I may scan the letter and post it here for you guys to take a look at it (without my name of course) and see what you think. Thanks to all for your support. It kinda freaked me out today.
Beercan

We've already seen a copy of the letter your referring to. No need to post it again. If it didn't arrive registered mail, then you never got it. What ever you do, do not contact DTV. If you do that then more than likely they will pursue you because they will assume your guilty and that they can scam you out of some cake. It may sound like weird advice, but the best thing to do in this case is nothing. As one poster suggested, wipe your ass with it and throw it away. Don't even go as far as to hire an attorney unless you get an official summons or a registered letter.

[Morpheux]

C&P From freedomfight, Someone actually countersued DTV, If they win DTV will have to think twice before sending their letters.

DirecTV v. Ohal - A New York couple sued by DirecTV has filed a counterclaim against DTV for $10,000,000 for R.I.C.O., violation of the New York Deceptive Practices Act (NY Gen Bus Law $349) and Fraud. Unlike the previous RICO claim filed against DTV in California which failed, the New York couple is armed with a decision in Calabrese v. CSC Holdings, 283 F.Supp2d 797 (E.D.N.Y. 2003) within which a federal judge sitting in New York refused to dismiss of similar RICO claim against a cablevision company for a letter scheme similar to DTV's. They are also armed with declarations from several former employees of DTV's end user group. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York. Unlike California, New York does not have an anti-slapp statute which DTV used to defeat the RICO claim filed in California. The O'Hal's attorneys can be found at ww■perrycamp■com

[beercan22]

C&P From freedomfight, Someone actually countersued DTV, If they win DTV will have to think twice before sending their letters.

DirecTV v. Ohal - A New York couple sued by DirecTV has filed a counterclaim against DTV for $10,000,000 for R.I.C.O., violation of the New York Deceptive Practices Act (NY Gen Bus Law $349) and Fraud. Unlike the previous RICO claim filed against DTV in California which failed, the New York couple is armed with a decision in Calabrese v. CSC Holdings, 283 F.Supp2d 797 (E.D.N.Y. 2003) within which a federal judge sitting in New York refused to dismiss of similar RICO claim against a cablevision company for a letter scheme similar to DTV's. They are also armed with declarations from several former employees of DTV's end user group. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York. Unlike California, New York does not have an anti-slapp statute which DTV used to defeat the RICO claim filed in California. The O'Hal's attorneys can be found at ww■perrycamp■com

Thanks for all you guys help! I feel much better now! LOL ! I will not contact anyone on this and let you guys know what happens. I say nothing.......I see nothing.........I hear nothing..............LOL !!!
Beercan

[gunther]

The letter has a case number on it and says to contact them by Oct. 8th or they will take it to court.

Yeah, I got the same letter. It's a scare tactic. That was over a years ago. If you ignore it, you get another more threatening letter, and then if you ignore that one you'll never hear from them again.

It's all designed to make you think they are going to sue you and it'll cost way more than $3500.

If you don't respond your name goes into the hat with the other several thousand who didn't respond. They go after high profile target at first, like people buying lots of equipment to resell. If you just bought a loader or two for your own use you'll probably die of old age before they thought about coming after you. It wouldn't matter though, because the statue of limitations would have run out by thenm and they'd still have to be able to prove that you actually used the stuff to hack cards.