Free satellite precedent

[Trapofmind]

I have heard this story several times and have no idea if it is true, although I would like for it to be; perhaps someone here can help.

The story goes: There once was this fellow who was sued or charged or whatever for descrambling his C-Band. For his defense, he said that he should be allowed because the signal was on his property and if they wanted him to stop; they should stop sending it onto his property.

According to the story, the judge ruled that he was allowed to do what he wanted with his property or that on his property but couldn’t make any money from the doing.

Question is: Is there any truth to this story and if so does anyone have the case number or other information so anyone else could use this law if need be for his or her defense.

[Reabo]

It only applied to UNSCRAMBLED signals.

[Trapofmind]

Why would that be? Scrambled or not, they are bouncing off my house without my permission!

[indal_98]

Why would that be? Scrambled or not, they are bouncing off my house without my permission!

Reabo is right...

it's not just it's bouncing off your yard....it's the encryption that got us in trouble...

You can do whatever you want as long as you don't come up with something to DECRYPT the signal ....

[scottymac]

Why would that be? Scrambled or not, they are bouncing off my house without my permission!
But you can't tell that without dycrypting the signal..



Kind of like the tree falling in the forest, if no one is around does it make a noise? question.

As long as Dave/Charlie/Beverley doesn't find out what you're doing with your signal...

[Kanapolis]

I wonder if I can stop them from sending the signal to my house, I mean hey, I don't want it hitting my proprety, can I bring them to court for "trespassing" !???

[indal_98]

I wonder if I can stop them from sending the signal to my house, I mean hey, I don't want it hitting my proprety, can I bring them to court for "trespassing" !???

Sure you can ....you may get to be a millionaire....

But then the judge would want to find out why you're not suing:

--Sprint PCS wireless...
--AT&T wireless....
--Cingular wireless...
--Cordless phones manufacturer...
--Gas company for having a pipe underneath your house...
--Cable TV company...
--NASA's transmissions....

Mind as well ...sue the FCC....They are the ones that issue licensing to them wireless/satellite guys.....

G'L

[Trapofmind]

The way I see it, if it's been on your property for more then 30 days it is legaly yours. It's mine to do with what I choose.

I own the equipment and don't much care for the silly argument that you can't own the cards. That's like putting; "property of TraPofMinD" on my whatever and giving it to someone who sells it. Is anyone going to say that it is still mine? How can Dave or Charlie then do that?

Anywho, what I want is a law to give those people who worry about the legality of it, if there is such an animal.

[scoe]

Sure you can ....you may get to be a millionaire....

But then the judge would want to find out why you're not suing:

--Sprint PCS wireless...
--AT&T wireless....
--Cingular wireless...
--Cordless phones manufacturer...
--Gas company for having a pipe underneath your house...
--Cable TV company...
--NASA's transmissions....

Mind as well ...sue the FCC....They are the ones that issue licensing to them wireless/satellite guys.....

G'L

The difference (in Canada) is that the telephone companies, BEV, the gas company the cable TV companies have the legal right and authorization to broadcast or cross your property. DishNet (or DAVE for that matter) has no such right (in Canada). In fact, they are specifically not allowed to broadcast in Canada and yet continue to trespass on our private property with their unauthorized signal. The same would be true in the U.S. for BEV. It seems ridiculous that the courts protect the rights of those who are not authorized, and yet trespass freely.

[Kanapolis]

The difference (in Canada) is that the telephone companies, BEV, the gas company the cable TV companies have the legal right and authorization to broadcast or cross your property. DishNet (or DAVE for that matter) has no such right (in Canada). In fact, they are specifically not allowed to broadcast in Canada and yet continue to trespass on our private property with their unauthorized signal. The same would be true in the U.S. for BEV. It seems ridiculous that the courts protect the rights of those who are not authorized, and yet trespass freely.


Thanks. I(n all actuallity, BEV is moving their sats away from the US, look a Florida, no more BEV !!! I thing that Dave will end up doing the same.

I will sue the FCC for trespassing "their" signal on my proprety! I'll call my lawer !

[tazspin]

It is the dmca that states you can't decrypt a encrypted signal wich doesn't apply to Canadians since thier goverment never sighned on to the dmca but it would apply to a U.S citizen decrypteing bev. But i agree that you should be able to do whatever you want on your property but we don't have that right in this country of the so called free (ok so maybe we have more freedoms than most countries but we are not truely free (zoning, prohibition of recreatinal substances, and all sorts of other laws that removed our freedom))

[Trapofmind]

Have I mentioned that I am looking for an American law? I think I rudely assumed that others would know this already.

I am not all that concerned should there be no legal precedent; I have Dave and Bev both set-up and doing my bidding. I will use what is on my property.

I am however interested for a few reasons:
1) Those whinny people who find out and say; “isn’t that ileagal!”
2) Have you seen the show MythBusters? I heard that “myth” and want to know if it is true.

[BirdieMod]

Somewhere around 1998 a federal law protecting digital satallite encryption was passed, C band went before that even if you were using a decoder. I don't have the exact details handy and don't pay attention to it..........