Dish Network or DirecTV

ducati996 · Feb 25, 2004

( It's my understanding that the purchase of such devices is legal; it's the use of them that may be illegal, and it's my understanding that Direct is suing people solely based on the purchase. One possible analogy that comes to mind would be that everyone who ever purchased a radar detecter would automatically be considered guilty of speeding and fined, without proof they ever were speeding. )

That was the false sense of security passed along by those selling the devices(to make money and sell more)...they are not legal and are not true ISO7816 compliant devices (see above for some of the reasons). People believe what they want to hear, but there isnt a case yet where this thought has worked with these devices. They were created for specific functions thats it....sugar coating it any other way is pure falacy...
Radar dectectors are legal to own and use in most states(some exceptions of course)..

Duc /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

fivestring · Feb 25, 2004

"One possible analogy that comes to mind would be that everyone who ever purchased a radar detecter would automatically be considered guilty of speeding and fined, without proof they ever were speeding." 

Using radar detectors is not illegal in some states, including NC.
(As a side note, a properly-used traffic radar will pick you up long before you pick it up and have time to slow down).
Also, when a radar detector goes off, it has no clue where the radar is in proximity to you. Bottom line, by the time the detector goes off, you've been detected. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
Years ago, officers would leave the radar on all the time (bad juju, causes cancer) and detectors would pick up the indiscriminate signal better. Now, most units are turned on and off by the officer once he/she spots your speeding vehicle. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif But, back to the subject.....
That's comparing apples to potatoes, anyway.
There are a lot of items for sale legally, but may be illegal to use...a few examples of some in NC:
tinted license plate covers....illegal to use.
blue-tinted lights on the front of vehicles...illegal to use.
dark-tinted windows....illegal to use.
television screens in the front seating area of a vehicle... illegal to use.
The list goes on.
It seems that the device used to program the cards for satellite receivers is both designed for an illegal purpose and illegal to use.
Maybe there are legitimate lawful uses for companies that program the DTV cards for DTV. It appears that any other use is illegal.

OkeeDon · Feb 25, 2004

My analogy of the radar detector was hypothetical -- a "what if" scenario. In fact, with your list of things that are legal to buy but illegal to use, you reinforce my case -- what if someone came along and sued every purchaser of those items, claiming that the mere purchase was evidence of illegal use. That is essentially what Direct is doing -- if you purchased a programmer, you must be guilty of stealing, whether or not you ever used it, for any reason! Thus, a person who might have been tempted, purchased a programming kit, then put it away (or threw it away) after further contemplation, is being sued by Direct as if they had actually "stolen" something.

Proving themselves innocent can cost more than the cost of simply paying up. And, my real complaint is that they must prove themselves innocent, or they are considered guilty --and that's just not the way our law is supposed to work. It's just wrong.

That's about all I'm going to say about this.

ducati996 · Feb 25, 2004

( My analogy of the radar detector was hypothetical -- a "what if" scenario. In fact, with your list of things that are legal to buy but illegal to use, you reinforce my case -- what if someone came along and sued every purchaser of those items, claiming that the mere purchase was evidence of illegal use. That is essentially what Direct is doing -- if you purchased a programmer, you must be guilty of stealing, whether or not you ever used it, for any reason! Thus, a person who might have been tempted, purchased a programming kit, then put it away (or threw it away) after further contemplation, is being sued by Direct as if they had actually "stolen" something.

Proving themselves innocent can cost more than the cost of simply paying up. And, my real complaint is that they must prove themselves innocent, or they are considered guilty --and that's just not the way our law is supposed to work. It's just wrong.

)
OkeeDon,
It sounds like we are picking on you which I'm not. Your statements are typically the response from those who have been involved in this matter directly or indirectly( Know someone). Since it effects those who are involved or got an innocent person involved I say the law protects the companies whose service was stolen as well. You steal, they have recourse. And the people who complain are pretty much the quilty ones...Dont forget if you are truly innocent you will have the opportunity to explain either in writing or before a judge and before it goes to trial. If you are truly innocent and can prove it, the cost will be overall very low. DTV is not in this to go to court everytime. They do it when they have enough to go forward. It cost's them money to take it all the way. From the time you recieve your first letter and the summons is enough time to resolve the matter before it goes to court...but people just dont want to accept responsibility for their actions and be truthful, so they whine and complain and say its unfair...Its funny as heck...just pay up and accept it as lesson learned...

Duc

dfeck · Mar 2, 2004

Duc,

You seem very knowledgeable about the subject. Either you work for Direct or an Attorney that is prosecuting for Direct. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Fess up!

Slamfire · Mar 6, 2004

So what happened to the original FCC establishment act which implicitly said that the public could receive anything that was broadcast, just wasn't permitted to disclose anything they heard or even that they heard it? That would include radar and even 60 cycle electricty.

ducati996 · Mar 7, 2004

( Duc,

You seem very knowledgeable about the subject. Either you work for Direct or an Attorney that is prosecuting for Direct. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Fess up! )

Very Knowledgable regarding this YES, Lawyer or DTV agent NO...

Just a realist who would accept responsibility for their actions if it applied to them /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Duc

BillG_in_TX · Mar 9, 2004

Well, DishNetwork and Viacom are going at it, which means that a lot of Dish customers are losing their local CBS feed - article. Strike 2 for Dish.

PBMAX · Mar 9, 2004

That must be what they were talking about on the news this mornin...
Did any of you see message scrolling over Spike TV and the comedy channel about DTV dropping them and several other channels ??? I was going to call and check it out but I lost the # after wrote it down... /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

fishman · Mar 9, 2004

What?! Comedy Central being dropped! I hope not. The wife and I enjoy watching standup occasionally on the weekends after the little'uns have gone to bed.