Attempt to steal satellite tv signals gets man 5yrs in prison and $180 million fine

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
I don't know why you can?t understand that software written specifically to pirate DTV programming and P2P software are completely different beats. DTV Pirating software has absolutely NO other use. When it?s downloaded, there is only 1 intent. With Kazaa you can download pictures and other things (like Mp3 and videos with no copyrights) and you are perfectly legal. All that has to be done is log what files you are downloading and they can determine if you are legit. If you?re downloading DTV software....come on, you?re naive if you think they are doing anything else with it.

You'd be naive to NOT think that at least 999 out of every 1000 people with Kazaa are using it to d/l copyrighted music and movies.

And believe it or not, there are obsessed hobbyists who find much pleasure in reading through the code and analyzing it..since we are dealing with somewhat complex security efforts here, which for some people can be exciting..yet never actually use it for illegal purposes. So even if that number is 1/10000 people, there still exists the possibility that the files are not being used for illegal activities..which is similar to the Kazaa concept.

Nevermind, you just dont understand, not worth explaining again.

Anyways...this guy is getting exactly what he deserves.

 

[Syringer]

I'm sorry, you're just too smart for me =/

Can anyone explain in simpler terms that I might possibly understand that why Kazaa is any different?

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
I don't know why you can?t understand that software written specifically to pirate DTV programming and P2P software are completely different beats. DTV Pirating software has absolutely NO other use. When it?s downloaded, there is only 1 intent. With Kazaa you can download pictures and other things (like Mp3 and videos with no copyrights) and you are perfectly legal. All that has to be done is log what files you are downloading and they can determine if you are legit. If you?re downloading DTV software....come on, you?re naive if you think they are doing anything else with it.

You'd be naive to NOT think that at least 999 out of every 1000 people with Kazaa are using it to d/l copyrighted music and movies.

And believe it or not, there are obsessed hobbyists who find much pleasure in reading through the code and analyzing it..since we are dealing with somewhat complex security efforts here, which for some people can be exciting..yet never actually use it for illegal purposes. So even if that number is 1/10000 people, there still exists the possibility that the files are not being used for illegal activities..which is similar to the Kazaa concept.

Nevermind, you just dont understand, not worth explaining again.

Anyways...this guy is getting exactly what he deserves.

Why can't you explain it? Because you can't, and you know it. Go away.

KK

 

[draggoon01]

Originally posted by: Syringer
I'm sorry, you're just too smart for me =/

Can anyone explain in simpler terms that I might possibly understand that why Kazaa is any different?

although i think we're all about equally smart here, i'll give it a shot.

the difference between your example of code enthusiast downloading program for fun and not illegal piracy, and kazaa is primary intent. on one hand you cannot for the most part, ban something simply because evil doers found a way to abuse the item, if the item in question has a legitimate primary intent. this goes for kazaa, which does have a legitimate use of file distribution. although everyone except grandma may use it for illegal use, and kazaa may be assumed by all to be only used illegally, the makers can claim it was designed for legal use and never advocated or promoted kazaa for piracy. a good parallel is a gun. lots of crimes are committed using guns, but the majority the burden for that crime is placed on the evil doer. guns do have legitimate use for sports such as hunting and target practicing.

now other parties can complain when the maker indirectly makes the item too easy to use for evil. and if courts agree, they can force the maker to modify the item. good example for this is napster.

and this type of reasoning goes all the way down to kitchen knives. a knife can be used to kill someone, but it does have primary legal use.

the problem with your example of programmer dude just downloading the satellite hack for fun, is that you cannot (as far as the arguments i've heard) justify that the program has a primary legal use. it's existence purely for illegal behavior. now when you try to justify with the reason, that programmer may just be looking at code for fun, you are only creating a secondary valid reason for him to be possessing the program. it would be the same as someone possessing drugs, and when busted, they claim they were just interested in studying plants or chemistry. in the case of drugs, the legal system has determined that certain ones are illegal, and therefore have only illegal primary use.

another example, though it may not be well thought out, of what you're saying with the programmer looking at code for fun, would be robbing a bank but not taking any money. if some robber did a hold up, asked for money, bank hands him money, but then robber just walks out empty handed, you cannot justify his actions with some sort of secondary reason of having fun, or checking security. the primary action of robbing is what counts most and cannot be overlooked because of some secondary reason.

hope that helps. i'm not positive here, just posting my thoughts. any disagreements welcome
.

 

[nan0bug]

Originally posted by: draggoon01

Originally posted by: Syringer
I'm sorry, you're just too smart for me =/

Can anyone explain in simpler terms that I might possibly understand that why Kazaa is any different?

although i think we're all about equally smart here, i'll give it a shot.

the difference between your example of code enthusiast downloading program for fun and not illegal piracy, and kazaa is primary intent. on one hand you cannot for the most part, ban something simply because evil doers found a way to abuse the item, if the item in question has a legitimate primary intent. this goes for kazaa, which does have a legitimate use of file distribution. although everyone except grandma may use it for illegal use, and kazaa may be assumed by all to be only used illegally, the makers can claim it was designed for legal use and never advocated or promoted kazaa for piracy. a good parallel is a gun. lots of crimes are committed using guns, but the majority the burden for that crime is placed on the evil doer. guns do have legitimate use for sports such as hunting and target practicing.

now other parties can complain when the maker indirectly makes the item too easy to use for evil. and if courts agree, they can force the maker to modify the item. good example for this is napster.

and this type of reasoning goes all the way down to kitchen knives. a knife can be used to kill someone, but it does have primary legal use.

the problem with your example of programmer dude just downloading the satellite hack for fun, is that you cannot (as far as the arguments i've heard) justify that the program has a primary legal use. it's existence purely for illegal behavior. now when you try to justify with the reason, that programmer may just be looking at code for fun, you are only creating a secondary valid reason for him to be possessing the program. it would be the same as someone possessing drugs, and when busted, they claim they were just interested in studying plants or chemistry. in the case of drugs, the legal system has determined that certain ones are illegal, and therefore have only illegal primary use.

another example, though it may not be well thought out, of what you're saying with the programmer looking at code for fun, would be robbing a bank but not taking any money. if some robber did a hold up, asked for money, bank hands him money, but then robber just walks out empty handed, you cannot justify his actions with some sort of secondary reason of having fun, or checking security. the primary action of robbing is what counts most and cannot be overlooked because of some secondary reason.

hope that helps. i'm not positive here, just posting my thoughts. any disagreements welcome
.

If I could grade posts, you'd get an A+

I don't really look down on people who 'steal' DTV signals since they're just floating around in the sky waiting to be taken by someone who knows what they're doing, and if I gave a crap about TV I'd probbably do it too, but on the other hand DTV has the right to protect their product.

 

[necro702]

Originally posted by: her209
Is there a 3 Strikes Law in Florida?

Doesn't matter. Its a federal case. He will be doing his
time in a federal pen not state of FLA pen.

I disagree with what they have done. This man will
never be able to pay that much money. Also they
are suing him for what he was going to do.. Not
something he actually done.. It just isn't right in my
book.

Should he be punished: YES

Fined this crazy amount.. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Fined a lesser more reasonable amount : YESSSS.

This guy is being made an example and I am strongly
against that tactic.. BS.

 

[ScottMac]

Kazaa people will be easier to bust (I'd think ... I don't use it myself).

If the Music police download copyrighted stuff from your site ... maybe a bunch of stuff from your site ... you're busted, you pay.

OR the other way, they set up a site with some really juicy stuff, they track where it goes... maybe even tag it so when they confiscate your system they can prove you have / had it and where it came from.

The FBI did a series of "stings" early on; they set up a site and tracked the people that bought stuff from 'em (access cards, programmers, unloopers, etc) then went through and busted the bunch of 'em in a couple sweeps.

Even if Kazaa is not an intrinsically tracable application, it'd be easy enough to build a port-specific probe to follow the path to the server (or client) where the stuff is coming from. If those assumptions are correct (I really don't know), it would be a "target rich" environment. With the FBI's broader monitoring powers these days, I wouldn't be surprised to see some monitors at or looking at ISPs watching for stuff like that to pass through (while watching for "terrorist traffic" ... something like that).

Time will tell, I s'pose.

Scott

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Syringer
I'm sorry, you're just too smart for me =/

Can anyone explain in simpler terms that I might possibly understand that why Kazaa is any different?

I did explain it. THREE FREAKING TIMES. You still never understood.

Let me make it extremely simple for you.

1. Kazaa has an actual use outside of just theft of intellectual property. It is a P2P program that also can share images, software, and music that is NOT copywritten. (A good example is a slimjim. Sure many car theives use them to steal cars, but their are good uses for them outside of that, so they are still legal, but they are meant to be used properly, if you are found using them illegally, you go to jail for stealing cars. Pretty simple eh?)

2. The SOLE and ONLY purpose of DTV DSS software is to STEAL and defraud DTV out of it's subscription and programing. There is NO other reason the software was written. The intent is already implied when you download it. (A good example would be radar detectors, their sole purpose is to detect police who are gunning for speeders, there is NO other excuse you could use for having one)

Did I dumb it down enough for you? Kazaa has atleast some merit outside of theft. Programs written intentionally to steal don't. Hence if you download it, expect to get into trouble, you are taking that risk.

KK: I explained it serveral times, but he throws in dumb analogies and doesn't seem to understand the primary difference between what their actual use is. If you have nothing to offer, go nef somewhere else.

 

[OulOat]

Originally posted by: draggoon01

Originally posted by: Syringer
I'm sorry, you're just too smart for me =/

Can anyone explain in simpler terms that I might possibly understand that why Kazaa is any different?

although i think we're all about equally smart here, i'll give it a shot.

the difference between your example of code enthusiast downloading program for fun and not illegal piracy, and kazaa is primary intent. on one hand you cannot for the most part, ban something simply because evil doers found a way to abuse the item, if the item in question has a legitimate primary intent. this goes for kazaa, which does have a legitimate use of file distribution. although everyone except grandma may use it for illegal use, and kazaa may be assumed by all to be only used illegally, the makers can claim it was designed for legal use and never advocated or promoted kazaa for piracy. a good parallel is a gun. lots of crimes are committed using guns, but the majority the burden for that crime is placed on the evil doer. guns do have legitimate use for sports such as hunting and target practicing.

now other parties can complain when the maker indirectly makes the item too easy to use for evil. and if courts agree, they can force the maker to modify the item. good example for this is napster.

and this type of reasoning goes all the way down to kitchen knives. a knife can be used to kill someone, but it does have primary legal use.

the problem with your example of programmer dude just downloading the satellite hack for fun, is that you cannot (as far as the arguments i've heard) justify that the program has a primary legal use. it's existence purely for illegal behavior. now when you try to justify with the reason, that programmer may just be looking at code for fun, you are only creating a secondary valid reason for him to be possessing the program. it would be the same as someone possessing drugs, and when busted, they claim they were just interested in studying plants or chemistry. in the case of drugs, the legal system has determined that certain ones are illegal, and therefore have only illegal primary use.

another example, though it may not be well thought out, of what you're saying with the programmer looking at code for fun, would be robbing a bank but not taking any money. if some robber did a hold up, asked for money, bank hands him money, but then robber just walks out empty handed, you cannot justify his actions with some sort of secondary reason of having fun, or checking security. the primary action of robbing is what counts most and cannot be overlooked because of some secondary reason.

hope that helps. i'm not positive here, just posting my thoughts. any disagreements welcome
.

You get an extra large cookie for an excellent post

 

[tcsenter]

If they sue you and you don't respond, they win by default. If they have *something* (like the site's logs, membership credit card info, and trace information they gather before it becomes public that they "own" the site), the current law allows them to sue you.

Woah, a minute a go you said if they send you "a letter" and you don't respond, they receive a default judgement in their favor. Now its if they file a lawsuit and you don't appear...which is it?

Of course any time you do not respond to a summons and fail to appear when you're named in a lawsuit, you lose by default. Nothing new about that.

 

[dquan97]

did he try to plea bargain?

 

[Double Trouble]

Now we can argue back and forth over whether 'stealing' signals that come into your home without your permission really is 'stealing' at all (the law says yes, but I think that's rather illogical), but to me it seem that our society has gotten all mixed up --- we levy harsh punishements (huge fines, prison time) on people who copy some song or watch a movie illegaly, but yet someone can pound someone else into a bloody pulp and get barely a slap on the wrist. Obviously, as a society we've decided that the profits of the corporation are worth a lot more than the rights and wellbeing of individuals.

 

[ScottMac]

IT starts with a letter "We intend to Sue you because ......"

If you don't respond (call DTV at the number in the first letter) ...

Then you get a "Last Chance" letter.

If you don't respond (call the DTV number in the letter) ...

Then they file suit, you get a supoena / summons / whatever, and the fun begins.

If you respond to one of the first two letters, they tell you what they have on you (so far), and what it'll cost you to settle, and a date that they must receive the payment (in full, usually 60 days or so). In addition to the cash, you usually have to subscribe at some level for a year.

Sorry if I was unclear.

Scott

 

[necro702]

Originally posted by: tagej
Now we can argue back and forth over whether 'stealing' signals that come into your home without your permission really is 'stealing' at all (the law says yes, but I think that's rather illogical), but to me it seem that our society has gotten all mixed up --- we levy harsh punishements (huge fines, prison time) on people who copy some song or watch a movie illegaly, but yet someone can pound someone else into a bloody pulp and get barely a slap on the wrist. Obviously, as a society we've decided that the profits of the corporation are worth a lot more than the rights and wellbeing of individuals.

well said. our prisons are overcrowded enough. mostly because
there are alot of people in there that don't need to be.

1. pot smokers
2. pirates
3. wife beaters
4. crackheads

hehe. just jokin about #3, #4. they need to be there in my opinion.

 

[Syringer]

Okay, well software might be one thing, but the hardware aspect of it is another, as ruled here:

DirecTV v. Eugene Karpinsky, Case No: 02-CV-73929, United States District Court
Eastern District of Michigan. The Court issued an Order granting Summary Judgment as to all counts of DirecTV's case against Eugene Karpinsky. The Court affirmed that contrary to DirecTV's argument, mere possession of two smartcard recovery systems is insufficient to support a finding of liability under 47 U.S.C. Sec. 605(a), 18 U.S.C. Sec 2511(1)(a), or 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2512(1)(B)or demonstrate a claim of conversion.



U.S. District Court

for the Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 02-CV-73929

DIRECTV Inc v. Karpinsky

Filed: 10/01/02
Assigned to: Judge George Caram Steeh

But to reiterate the software clause..you guys simply have no idea what process is required to actually program a card, and understandably so. It is not a simple matter of d/l, click, you have free TV. There is a much lengthier process involved.

I'm sure we can both agree that the hardware that most people use to program their DTV cards AREN'T only used, and are not ONLY intended to use for programming DTV. Like Kazaa, people use it for other purposes, since DTV encryption is similar to methods that other companies use in security/smart cards. In fact, they don't even program DTV cards out of the box, but rather you usually have to flash them, resulting in a considerably different product in order to use them.

Now that that's out of the way, you can also agree with me that not ALL software related to in operation of these programmers are 100% intended ONLY for stealing TV. There is first a program that operates the functions of the programmer..one of which is opening scripts that will write to the file. I'll follow your logic and state that it is in fact these scripts that are SOLELY intended to steal TV..however the PROGRAM that is used is merely what is used to operate the programmer, which, as is just discussed, can be used to function other things as well..for example cleaning/fixing the card. Clearly then, the program has MANY legal uses, similar to Kazaa, but most people that d/l them will of course use it for stealing TV.

To make a long story short then, scripts used to put on cards: 100% solely intended to steal TV..program used to implement script, can be used for legal purposes.

The problem is then, that the programs that are offered on the SAME website that offers illegal scripts. It'd be like a warez type site that offered Kazaa for d/l, as well as copyrighted movies/songs. And..since you would agree that possessing Kazaa in itself is not illegal, the same argument may be applied to this as well.

 

[silverpig]

I wonder where the law stands if you design, build, and program your own hardware for "stealing" sattelite? I mean, they beam the info to you for free...

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: silverpig
I wonder where the law stands if you design, build, and program your own hardware for "stealing" sattelite? I mean, they beam the info to you for free...

In there eye's it's illegal. That is a load of crap. There should be a class action lawsuit against them from broadcasting their signal to people that don't want it. Think of it this way, local television broadcasts are basically the same. What if they start charging people to using there signal to watch tv? Would they then sue everyone who buys rabbit ears. It's fvckin ridiculous what direct tv is doing. Nothing more than a bank sending you money and telling you not to spend it and they keep sending it.

KK

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: silverpig
I wonder where the law stands if you design, build, and program your own hardware for "stealing" sattelite? I mean, they beam the info to you for free...

In there eye's it's illegal. That is a load of crap. There should be a class action lawsuit against them from broadcasting their signal to people that don't want it. Think of it this way, local television broadcasts are basically the same. What if they start charging people to using there signal to watch tv? Would they then sue everyone who buys rabbit ears. It's fvckin ridiculous what direct tv is doing. Nothing more than a bank sending you money and telling you not to spend it and they keep sending it.

KK

That's basically what I think too. If the post office sends you encrypted mail and you decipher it on your own, I don't think they should be able to sue you. It's a bit different if you sold the cipher to everyone for a profit though...