Behind the Satellite Piracy Lawsuit

Fire Michael!! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 00:43 · Score: -1, Troll

First anti-Michael post, and first post. How delightful! I'm eating Cocoa Puffs. Good morning!

Re:Fire Michael!! by News+For+Turds · 2002-05-31 01:08 · Score: -1

No. Nope. I cannot allow this to happen. No way.
I hereby claim this FP in the name of the CLIT!
Let's hear it for all da logged in trolls! CLIT! Woohoo!
Ok... Say it with me...
G to da mutha phukken oatse
C to da mutha phukken izzzzzzex
HellZ yeah, you know how it is bizznitch

[slashdot.org][slashdot.org]dumbass[slashdot . rg]

--
-- You are such a fucking fag

AV - 1st *hic* by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 00:46 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Yes, and anti-virus companies write the virii, of course.

*yawn*

fdsa fds fdsa by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 00:46 · Score: -1, Troll

fist? prost?

WORST EVER TROLL FICTION COMPETITION by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 00:46 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Mandi's voluptuous curves emphasised the singlemindedness of a Reaganite generation. Her wholesome rump, which would do a farmer proud in even the most competitive Texan meat markets, once again interrupted my field of vision to the birds perching nonchalantly on the roof of the opposite building. Two years, three months, four days and one hour into my job at dotcomrevolution.com, and the word on the seventh floor was that the VC's were about to cut off our air supply. These gulls were my only break from the monotony of BSD server administration, and Mandi had to be punished for her countless intrusive hours at the photocopier.
"Your ass is blocking my view," I mumbled.

"What did you say?" she roared. Well, it was more an angry squeak than a raw. I just had to block out the irritating, high-pitched whine that characterised all Mandi's replies, and my instincts caused my right hand to jump onto the air conditioning knob for the server room, turning it up to full blast.

"You -- that again -- I'll -- the manager!" she continued, her voice drowned out by the healthy whir of the most expensive fans in Christendom. I looked at her and grinned. "I can't think -- that -- noise! Turn -- off now!" She was trying to keep her cool (an act made all the easier by the now exceptional air conditioning), but even a blind man could have felt the heat from her cheeks as they began to turn a rosy red with rage.

"I'm afraid I can't do that, Mandy," I responded. I guess she looked like more of a Dave than a Mandy, her smooth but noticeably dark follicles of facial hair contrasting with her pasty skin under the lifeless fluorescence of office lighting, but she would not have understood the reference anyway.

With that, I turned back to my console and resumed my xtank session. But what was this? Out of the corner of my eye, I saw water begin to drip out of the corner of Mandy's eye, while she was sitting in my assistant's chair. (Well, I called it the assistant's chair, I had not actually had an assistant since late 1999, when I selected him to be the scapegoat for my rather poor backup schedule.)

"Why must you always make fun of me? I'm just trying to do my job," she blubbed. Sitting close to me now, not even $10,000 of Taiwanese ventilation could block out her piercing tone. "Ever since I got this job the guys here have made fun of me for my shape, why can't they just respect me for who I am."

A change of heart that would have made Montgomery Burns proud caused me to stand up and walk over to the wreck. I wanted to explain this rationally to her, in terms of the mating habits of the human male, and the desire for a woman fit for childbearing and housework, but there was no time for that (it was ten minutes to five). "I'm sorry," I uttered, and rested my hand on Mandy's shoulder, fearing a lawsuit.

Mandy stood up, and without hesitation put her arms round me, whispering, "Thank you." I reciprocated, grateful for a secure office lacking in inside windows. Instead of letting go, she squeezed me harder, and her tears began to stain the shoulder of my designer shirt. I motioned to back away, and in doing so my hand slipped downwards, brushing against her behind.

"I'm not so repulsive, am I?" she questioned.

I was racking my brain for a diplomatic response. "I guess there are advantages to looking at you over the gulls and the hypnotising router LEDs," I confessed. "And unlike with the routers, I'm not called out when you break down. And you don't leave a mess on the roof..."

"That's the nicest thing anyone's ever told me," she interrupted. "Do you have a girlfriend?"

(I'm a geek. Do you have a girlfriend? Exactly.)

"I'm, um, er.. I'm playing the field," was my closest attempt at honesty without offending my manhood. "I dont like to deprive others of my attention by focussing too much on one person."

"That's a shame," she said, and then her tone of voice changed completely. "Because I was so hoping to score before next week's lay-off."

"NEXT WEEK?" There was no chance that I would be able to return my home-brewed Beowulf cluster of 'borrowed' workstations so soon, and I had expected at least two week's warning from management. "Oh, and I know about your Beowulf cluster," she whispered, "but I'm sure I can use my special relationship with your boss to make it easier for you to return the equipment. The question is, what can you do for me?"

to be continued...

Kickin' It Ole School by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 00:48 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Whereas Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, and other military chieftains, have by force of arms, overthrown the federal institutions of Mexico, and dissolved the social compact which existed between Texas and the other members of the Mexican Confederacy, now the good people of Texas, availing themselves of their natural rights, SOLEMNLY DECLARE,

That they have taken up arms in defence of their rights and liberties, which were threatened by encroachments of military despots, and in defence of the republican principles of the federal constitution of Mexico, of 1824.
That Texas is no longer morally or civilly bound by the compact of union; yet stimulated by the generosity and sympathy common to a free people, they offer their support and assistance to such of the members of the Mexican Confederacy as will take up arms against military despotism.
That they do not acknowledge that the present authorities of the nominal Mexican Republic, have the right to govern within the limits of Texas.
That they will not cease to carry on war against the said authorities, whilst their troops are within the limits of Texas.
That they hold it to be their right, during the disorganization of the federal system, and the reign of despotism to withdraw from the union, to establish an independent government, or to adopt such measures as they may deem best calculated to protect their rights and liberties; but that they will continue faithful to the Mexican government so long as that nation is governed by the constitution and laws, that were framed for the government of the political association.
That Texas is responsible for the expenses of her armies, now in the field.
That the public faith of Texas is pledged for the payment of any debts contracted by her agents.
That she will reward by donations in land, all who volunteer their services in her present struggle, and receive them as citizens.

These declarations we solemnly avow to the world, and call God to witness their truth and sincerity, and invoke defeat and disgrace upon our heads, should we prove guilty of duplicity."

Re:Kickin' It Ole School by neal+n+bob · 2002-05-31 03:09 · Score: 0

yeah haw!! The Republic of Texas supports CLIT.

the nerd never gets the girl by bunungs · 2002-05-31 00:49 · Score: -1

I will start this article by first explaining a bit about myself. I'm pretty much a nerd. Life goes on, if you don't like that then stop reading now. By many of the females I know I'm considered a 'nice guy' something that I have always been uncomfortable with. Not for the fact that deep down I long to be 'not nice' to the opposite sex and pick them up by using such wonderful techniques as "Dumb Sports Star", "Date Rapist" and my 'favourite' "Finished school, no direction, maccas employee" - but more on these type of people later. I want to be not 'the nice guy' for the sole fucking reality that the nice guy never gets the girl. This summery of the past few months will once again prove that this is the case.

This 'saga' of what I now feel compelled to call, "The worst fucking luck on earth", began after a girl who I'd grown to like a fair amount dumped my sorry ass. But at the time it was what I wanted as well, I just don't have the guts to hurt people's feelings, and prefer to take the pain of carrying on instead of breaking it off. We split because of religious differences, that is I am and atheist, and she's not. And in my poor fucking foresight I lost a good friend because I was too stupid to realise what a nice person she was. But that is water under the bridge now.

During this time bitching and moaning about how there was never going to be a girl for me, I was sub-consciously seduced by the girl who this article really centres about. Oh and when I mean girl I think I really mean, mentally unstable she-bitch. She had been in my class the whole year, she was not the greatest looking girl in the world, but she accepted me for who I was and I felt compelled to return the favour. So after what was probably 3 months of courting I asked her out, now you see, I didn't really ask her out because I lusted after her, but because I didn't know where to take the relationship to next, she was female and my best friend, and well being 17 and under-sexed, my hormones got the better of me. At the time I actually asked her out I was quite horny, as I'd just witnessed the greatest aphrodisiac that is on this earth - The Harry Potter Movie, and the reaction I got from her needed no words to reply. She shoved her tongue down my throat, I hadn't expected that kind of reaction, but that's what I got.

Now we progress a few months to, if my sieve of a brain can recall, just after Christmas time. By this stage I had grown accustomed to her, and every minute I spent by her side made me very happy. But she calls me into her room crying, she asks if we can call it off. I ask why, then after a while talking about it, she changes her mind, but after that I'm fairly sure that she still wanted to be with me, at least for 3 more months. So 3 more months pass and it was the night of her birthday, I was just comfortable, I felt like there was nothing that could break us up. Then 2 days later she comes over to my place, tears my heart out, starts the lawnmower, rides over it a couple of times, and to make sure my ability to care for a member of the opposite sex won't ever work again she picks up the pieces wraps them in a bag, and takes them to what I assume is her lair to consume for dinner that night. That I was fine with, it gives a nerd a bad reputation to have a girl friend. But as she left, she gave me hope, she said something to the affect of, "It's just that I don't have time for a boy friend right now, I have work, school, and music - I bet you that I will regret this decision in a few days and we'll get back together." She also said, "It's not you it's me" But I just laughed at her when she said that, she knew the second she said it that it was a stupid thing to say as I deconstructed it right there and then in front of her.

ANYWAY FOLKS THESE WORDS WERE JUST DECEPTION AND LIES ON HER PART!

After giving me the standard "2 months so that I don't feel guilty about dumping my boy friend for another guy" period. She seduces another poor soul. This is a guy that she works with at maccas. Whilst I have bitter feelings towards the guy, which I have never met, I know that he is not to blame. Actually maybe he is the fucking basted.

Oh well enough back story

In the introduction I made a slight reference to the kind of guy that I'm not and will hopefully never be - but unfortunately, they are also the ones that get the girls.

Dumb Sports Star - This is the most common kind of male at my homo-erotic school (not that there's any thing wrong with being gay, as long as your family accepts you and your happy). All they care about is sport, sex and alcohol. You can commonly witness these kinds of people driving Utes, even though they live 4 minutes drive from school and have no use for the tray. There method of getting a girl is looking for the most pretty, dumb thing that walks there way. According to there morals there is no need for brains when you are shagging something. But the jokes on them when they get there girlfriends pregnant because they didn't' use a condom. Well done sports brain!

Date Rapist - Whilst not technically a rapist in this situation, these are the most dodgy people at our school, they love there FUBU jackets and visors. They smoke quite a bit, and have no objection to beating people up and breaking any rule to get things there way. There preferred method to getting a girl is to either spike there drink with rookies or to just wait till the girl has drunken so much that she doesn't know up from down, left from right, or nice sensible nerd from possible date rapist. They move in for the kill, but not to worry, it's usually over in about 2-3 minutes, as there dick's are either too small to find, or they only have the stamina of an African humming bird.

Finished school, no direction, maccas employee - These fuckers are the ones I despise the most, because this is what I was dumped for. Now to quote my ex (the night I officially discovered she had a new boyfriend, even though I'd pieced it together over a week before) "I don't know, he's 19, I'm 17, he has an OK taste in movies, but we're from different worlds. He enjoys getting drunk with his friends, and I'm not like that", now WTF!?! Why are you going out with this guy? Why is she attracted to this guy? The answer is because he fits into one of my unfairly created stereotypes. Now for the deconstruction of this stereotype: Whilst not all are bad people, they feel a compelling urge to solicit younger girls, stealing them from the age group that they are actually from, yet after a while the girl realises that she is dating someone with no direction that always wants his way. If the girl doesn't get out of the trap they are destined to become a working mother, divorced by age 30. They make there move by just being themselves, lazy slackers. The female is instinctively drawn to this by there, "Oh my maybe I can fix him and make him respectable gene", but this is usually overpowered by the males, "WOMAN, get me a beer" gene.

Now any nerds or "not-normal" people out there. Unless you want to live a lonely life, suggest that you become one of these kinds of men or your girlfriend will leave you for one. Me? I would rather die alone then let that happen, so I guess I'm fucked These guys will do anything to get some poon, and that unfortunately means your lady friends are also on the menu.

Life is pain, and pain is life. Lucky I wasn't in love or some shit like that.

OT: World Cup Audio by InterruptDescriptorT · 2002-05-31 00:53 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Does anyone know where I can find World Cup audio streams on line? fifaworldcup.com is suffering from the beloved /. effect, so I can't even get through. I was hoping someone knew of another source to listen to the play-by-play.

ObSatellite: I bet if I had a satellite dish and a subcarrier audio receiver, I could hear it right now. :-)

--
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)

Not anything like a Bond film by bunyip · 2002-05-31 00:58 · Score: -1, Troll

One major difference between this story and a Bond film - there are no 6ft uber-models, featuring infeasibly large breasts almost bursting from their skin tight leotards, wielding deadly weapons as they cartwheel across the room,.....

Gimme the 6ft uber-models!

Pleeeeeeezzzzzzze.............

Porn by daserver · 2002-05-31 00:58 · Score: 1

I admit it, I am the one who broke the cards so that I could stay up and watch porn. Are you all happy now?

money is power by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 00:59 · Score: -1, Troll

Power corrupts. Ultimate power corrupts ultimately.

Re:money is power by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 01:29 · Score: 0

To be exact:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men
are almost always bad men."
-John Emerich Edward Dalberg

When will we learn... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 01:00 · Score: 0

When will we learn that the biggest threat to our liberty is not the government, but corporations?

Re:When will we learn... by ThinkingGuy · 2002-05-31 01:49 · Score: 1

Answer: Never, because it is only through government that corporations can truly threaten our liberty. Note some of the most common ways that corporations abuse their power:

lobbying for preferential treatment under the (confusing and complex) tax laws
using the goverment to steal property for them, through abuse of imminent domain
putting competitors out of business, not by competing or by making superior products, but by lobbying the government for regulations that their competitors are unable to afford.
forcing (I mean truly forcing, as in "threat of fines and jail time) you and me to buy their products, by having the government make them "mandatory."
All these are impossible for a corporation, no matter how evil, to accomplish on its own. They require cooperation of politicians and bureaucrats who are more interested in power than in doing what is just.
The principle of "separation of church and state" is strongly ingrained in our society. We need to defend the idea of "separation of corporation and state" just as strongly.
Re:When will we learn... by corian · 2002-05-31 02:10 · Score: 1

When will we learn that the biggest threat to our liberty is not the government, but corporations?

When will we realize that, while seemingly coming from different sides, anti-globalisationists and libertarians are really afraid of the same thing: unrestrained power.

The difference is that the anti-capitalists don't trust corporations, while libertarians don't trust governments/politicians.

So, which really corrupts -- money, or power?
Re:When will we learn... by bafu · 2002-05-31 03:14 · Score: 1

When will we learn that the greatest threat to our liberty are people that we don't know who, nonetheless, have the will and the ability to manage how we live our daily lives? When will we learn that humans are wired to want to control their environment, and that other people are part of that environment? When will we learn that the humans most likely to be in positions of power are the humans who most enjoy wielding power? When will we learn that the more power we give them, the more control they will attempt to exert over greater numbers of us? When will we learn that governments, having been granted the power to coerce others in ways we'd never allow a private entities to do, are vast repositories of power? When will we learn that some corporations, desperate to wield that power on their behalf, are willing to organize themselves and their business models to have the best chance of influencing how that power is used? When will we learn that the concentration of coercive power is acting as an "attractive nuisance"? When will we learn that the kneejerk desire to increase that power in a vain attempt to "solve" every problem is actually part of the problem itself?

And, of course, when will I learn not to be trolled? :-P

hmmmm... not today, apparently. ;-)
Re:When will we learn... by withak53 · 2002-05-31 03:47 · Score: 1

money=power

So both. :-)

More like an Austin Powers movie... by TheNecromancer · 2002-05-31 01:01 · Score: 1

Somebody call in Austin Powers, a new Dr. Evil has emerged (Rupert Murdoch)! Hurry, before he creates a Mini-Me, and an angst-ridden son, Scott!

--
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart

Re:More like an Austin Powers movie... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-06-01 00:31 · Score: 0

Actually, Rupert's angst-ridden son's name is Lachlan. He's been appearing in court a lot recently over the death of a telco called "One.Tel", hence the angst

What are we going to do tonight Rupert? by bobdown2001 · 2002-05-31 01:02 · Score: 5, Funny

Same thing we do everynight Pinky.......Try to take over the worlds media!

--
Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow?

James Bond? by Spiffed · 2002-05-31 01:10 · Score: 1

Didn't this kind of thing happen in James Bond: Tomorrow Never Dies? So does that mean that a stealth boat will start a war between Afghanistan and the US?

Re:James Bond? by pan0k · 2002-05-31 02:09 · Score: 1

No, it mean that Rupert Murdoch should follow the most important rule of business - That's to give what the public wants.
Re:James Bond? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 12:55 · Score: 0

Not at all Bond stopped the stealth boat from starting a war. Please remember the whole story.

'Encouraged Piracy' by Thomas+M+Hughes · 2002-05-31 01:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

From the article:

There's also a long-standing notion that piracy is good for the business. In an odd twist, tacitly allowing people to watch pirated TV is a way to gain market share, since many pirates eventually give in and convert to paying customers.

I hadn't expected to hear that on MSNBC. In fact, I'm led to wonder if the 'higher ups' even know of this policy. The management of media companies seem to be more prone to saying things like "Ad skipping is theft!" "Napster costs us billions each year." etc, etc. One really has to wonder why big media is really cracking down on piracy, if they have people in their ranks who have been encouraging pirates all along.

Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 01:19 · Score: 0

I'd have to agree. Furthermore, I'm not so sure that this was such a smart business move (if it was one) for NDS. Who does the market studies anyway to determine how many "hackers" convert to paying customers? Furthermore, if a hacker was using a hacked Canal Plus card, and decided to start paying, wouldn't they be more inclined to start paying Canal Plus a subscription--rather than NDS?
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by jcoy42 · 2002-05-31 01:21 · Score: 2, Insightful

The management of media companies seem to be more prone to saying things like "Ad skipping is theft!" "Napster costs us billions each year." etc, etc.

It's to guilt people into paying, and it works. That's why pirates eventually become paying customers.

In general, the only pirates they are after are the ones profiting from it- they could care less about the little guys. Giving away free samples has always been a way to broaden the market share long term.

--
Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by liquidsin · 2002-05-31 01:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Probably because making such a stink about it brings it to the attention of your average joe. I'm sure a lot of people didn't know about napster until it was all over the media for being evil. Wave it under their noses, show them it's there, then when they get hooked on the free stuff, take it away and they'll pay for your product to get it. Kind of like how a drug dealer works...

--
do not read this line twice.
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by cetan · 2002-05-31 02:17 · Score: 1

they COULD'NT care less.

COULD NOT

not could.

I'm not a grammer nazi, I just get hot and bothered by this mistake.

--
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 02:50 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Did you mean COULDN'T?
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 02:53 · Score: -1, Offtopic

they COULD'NT care less.

I think you mean COULDN'T.

And they *could* care less. But it just isn't interesting enough for them to make the effort.
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by elgecko · 2002-05-31 03:53 · Score: 3, Interesting

There's also a long-standing notion that piracy is good for the business. In an odd twist, tacitly allowing people to watch pirated TV is a way to gain market share, since many pirates eventually give in and convert to paying customers.
I hadn't expected to hear that on MSNBC. In fact, I'm led to wonder if the 'higher ups' even know of this policy.

Of course they do. Back a few years ago when there were three office application suites that all had a decent market share for PC's (being WordPerfect, Lotus and MSOffice), Micro$oft released it's Office97 suite, and also offered $5-$10 try out that were nearly identical to the full suite, with exception of a 90-day expiration. This expiration was extremely easy for crackers to break (I believe as simple as altering a single byte), and downloadable patches were on the Internet within a day of the Office97 release.

This cheap way to obtain the full suite for a few dollars, rather than paying for the more expensive and better protected competitors suites destroyed their market shares and in a matter of months Micro$oft have over 95% of all office application users utilizing their own software. By the '2000' release of their office suite, the copy protection was now nearly uncrackable, but they'd already secured their monopoly. Users, no longer trained in other suites, were stuck in using whatever Micro$oft provided.

The MS part of MSNBC knows all to well the value of piracy in gaining initial pirated users who become paying customers later.
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 05:37 · Score: 0

Irony is... If you are going to correct someone you might want to make sure your correction is correct.

The proper form of the contraction is couldn't. You are replacing the o in not with the apostrophe, not the space.
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by jafac · 2002-05-31 05:51 · Score: 2

It could be said that Netscape's lax policy on piracy of their browser was what forced Microsoft to offer IE for free. This is the big dirty secret of all IP. Give it away for free to gain marketshare, then when the competition is dead, squeeze the users for cash.

To be fair, MS has not turned around and started to charge for IE. But since it's bundled with the OS, it effectively DOES make them money. And it's not just the browser market they're trying to dominate. It's the web standards mindshare. That market's still not tied up.

--

These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Re:'Encouraged Piracy' by cetan · 2002-06-02 16:02 · Score: 1

That argument is a load of shit. They don't care less. They could not care any less. Period.

You're making excuses for lazy ass speakers.

--
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!

Yeah, right..... by BenJeremy · 2002-05-31 01:14 · Score: 3, Interesting

So if I give people my competitor's service away FREE it somehow increases my own?

Unlikely.

Re:Yeah, right..... by JoshMKiV · 2002-05-31 01:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

No, but it can help bring them down, reduce revenues, and allow you to be in a better position. However, I think the number of people that would steal TV would not have a huge impact.

I think the biggest impact would be the compromised system requiring replacement, which can be big $$$.
Re:Yeah, right..... by cluke · 2002-05-31 01:19 · Score: 2

Sure, you take a short term hit, but the idea is to drive your competitor out of business - after all, they can't afford to pump out all those channels if no one is paying for them.
Re:Yeah, right..... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 01:22 · Score: 0

Well, it eventually undermines your competitor's subscriber base, and if you're a gazillionaire to begin with, you can afford to take a loss while this process unfolds in a battle of attrition manner of speaking.
Re:Yeah, right..... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 01:52 · Score: 0

You havent seen the shit they put out. If they had any brains they wouldnt be doing the cheesy satellite programming they do! News rabbit indeed! Can they dumb it down any further?
Re:Yeah, right..... by old7 · 2002-05-31 04:11 · Score: 1

The point is that by releasing a hack for a competing smart card, especially if it is timed properly, you can hurt their negotiations with a satellite provider giving you the edge. Quick example if smart card company A and smart card company B are both vying for a contract for TV satellite provider Q and a hack for smart card company A comes out during a critical stage during negotiations then smart card company B has a decisive edge. Smart card companies need contracts in order to sell cards. Once they have the contract it might even be favorable to leak hacks for their cards, at the right time, in order to sell more cards. They could also take this as an opportunity to show how quickly they respond to hacking. It never hurts if you know how and when the attack comes. It gives you great chance to respond. This can increase your perceived value to the satellite providers.
Re:Yeah, right..... by coronaride · 2002-05-31 05:59 · Score: 1

no, but the lack of revenue will hurt the competition in the long run..

--
Those who can, do. Those who can't, go into business for themselves.

Piracy and Trespassing by swordboy · 2002-05-31 01:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

Hey - it is my property. I didn't give you permission to blanket it with satellite TV. I'll use your service unless you keep you damned dirty broadcasts out of my land!

--

Life is the leading cause of death in America.

Re:Piracy and Trespassing by Tryfen · 2002-06-01 01:55 · Score: 1

Yes you did. Your elected officials sold the public spectrum to these companies.

--
If a square is really a rhombus, why aren't all triangles purple?

Behind Page Widening by CmderTaco · 2002-05-31 01:17 · Score: -1

--
- Marco

Life imitates art! by Caradoc · 2002-05-31 01:17 · Score: 2

This looks an awful lot like the plot from "Weapons of Mass Distraction," with Ben Kingsley and Gabriel Byrne.

Great movie, albeit completely depressing, as the two media moguls don't back down from their feud until they've utterly destroyed the lives of their own families.

--
Specialization is for insects. - R.A.H.

Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Dark+Nexus · 2002-05-31 01:18 · Score: 5, Informative

One thing about the piracy in Canada that the article fails to mention:

While the signals have been ruled public domain (and thus don't need to be payed for) since the American providers do not have a broadcast licensce in Canada, it HAS been ruled illegal to sell the equipment for those services.

Best reference to this I could find can be found here.

Short version:

Illegal to buy, but legal to use.

--
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."

Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by seann · 2002-05-31 02:36 · Score: 1

is it illegal to buy, or illegal to posses?
so If I went and made such equipment, or if it was given to me as a gift?

--
I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 02:51 · Score: 0

So...it's just like pot is here de facto...
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Dark+Nexus · 2002-05-31 02:58 · Score: 2

Well..

After digging a bit more, I've hit some conflicting information on usage - from saying it's OK, to it's illegal, to not mentioning it at all.

But it has been made illegal to buy/sell the equipment in Canada.

Well, for now. They're still in court.

--
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Tackhead · 2002-05-31 05:14 · Score: 3, Interesting

> > illegal to buy, or illegal to posses? so If I went and made such equipment, or if it was given to me as a gift?
>
> [conflicting information on usage] But it has been made illegal to buy/sell the equipment in Canada.
The original question was probably along the lines of: "Is it legal to download plans, PIC code, purchase discrete components, burn your own PICs, mount the components on a PCB, and hook it up to a TV?", and "Is it legal for a builder to give away such devices?"
Personally, I'd like to see the answer to those questions be "yes", with a ban on commercial manufacture/sales.
I think one of the coolest things that could happen would be for a complete design to "leak" its way onto the 'net. I've got no ethical problems with a guy building his own gear to l33ch TV. I do have an ethical problem with a guy who has the plans, refuses to share, and charges $500 for a p1r4t3 box.
Paying a satellite company for service is giving a media company money for s scarcity that's only somewhat artificial. (On one hand, the signal's landing in everyone's backyard. On the other hand, someone spent $MEGABUX to launch the sats that provide the datastreams, so there's a high barrier to entry. Launch your own damn satellite if you don't like his ;-)
But paying a DBS pirate reseller for devices based on plans and code developed through reverse engineering is merely buying into another artificial scarcity -- except that the reseller of h4x0r3d cards has a very low investment, and is thus price-gouging.
The guy cracking DBS may be a genius, but the guy in the back room selling cards has no such mad sk1llz. He's just taking advantage of the fact that the code for the cards isn't widely-available on the 'net. In that sense, he's very much like the RIAA or MPAA exec; his business model is all about a device that costs him next to nothing to reproduce, and charging you for code he didn't write. His existence depends on making sure nobody else can get the code to burn their own PICs. It's not just an artificial scarcity, it's the definition of an artificial scarcity.
If you continued to aggressively pursue the illegal sale of these boxes, but passed a law that explicitly permitted both the reverse-engineering of such datastreams and the free-as-in-beer downloading of plans and code, you could eliminate the commercial DBS piracy market in a month.
The market would then come down to two people: (1) People who choose to pay money to a DBS provider for service, or (2) people with a few less scruples who choose to pay in time/effort keeping up with the engineering arms race for service.
Is that as good for the DBS providers as a market where everyone who views, pays their share of the freight for the expenses involved in putting the sats aloft? No.
Is it better than the current situation, where we still have slightly-unscrupulous people who choose to pirate, but who, in doing so, support a line of highly unscrupulous people (i.e. whose livelihoods are based on hoarding the reverse-engineered secrets?) IMNSHO, yes.
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by shepd · 2002-05-31 06:53 · Score: 1

>The market would then come down to two people: (1) People who choose to pay money to a DBS provider for service, or (2) people with a few less scruples who choose to pay in time/effort keeping up with the engineering arms race for service.

The funny thing is most people who build those devices for themselves were never interested in purchasing TV anyways (you'll find a lot of them have BUDs out back ;-)

--
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 07:01 · Score: 0

What's so funny about that ruling is how it forces the Canadian government to censor us from such absolutely morally crushing stations like:

- NASA-TV
- The Hallmark Channel
- TechTV (American version with Max Headroom)

Unless you buy a C-Band dish.

As long as Max Headroom is on TechTV and my C-Band dish is broke, you can bet I'll get my Max fix _some_ way.
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Tripster · 2002-05-31 11:42 · Score: 1

My BUD sits proudly out front of my house just waiting for the RCMP to come raid me for my illegal activities, I also purchase programming from HBO and Starz for it, which according to some in Canada makes me a criminal.

Frankly, I don't care what they think, if they ever did bust down the door to see what I'm watching on TV I will likely be exiting this country shortly thereafter, for somewhere else as I feel my freedoms are too restricted if the government decides what I can and cannot watch on television.
Re:Canadian "Grey" market not so grey anymore by Mana+Mana · 2002-06-01 18:17 · Score: 1

The NY Times had a very good article depicting this topic 2002/05/09. Here's one good site, selling the blank cards, and the hardware programmers for them when they get zapped by the sat TV companies, etc. Check out the Usenet groups on this subject, e.g., alt.satellite.tv.crypt.
To sum it up, the techie user can purchase blank cards, shipped to anywhere in the world; buy a card hardware-programmer to reset the card when it gets periodically zapped by the tv companies; you can easily get new programming updates to defeat said electronic zaps/bombs/bullets/pulses via the Web from fellow pirates^Wunathorized users. Oh, originally, blank cards where had by the layman from low-balled Walmart dss receiver offers. Walmart specials, iow, where had for $100USD+, the cards were ripped out, and the receiver itself was discarded. Read the piece, it'll become clearer.

So... by CmderTaco · 2002-05-31 01:24 · Score: -1

What's the deal with michael and Seth Finkelstein?

--
- Marco

MORE! GIVE ME MORE!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 01:28 · Score: -1, Offtopic

I can't wait for the conclusion!

Well done, troll. Well done.

Murdoch? by jahalme · 2002-05-31 01:32 · Score: 1

What, is Murdoch up with his evil schemes
once again? No worries, just make a phonecall
to the Phoenix foundation and MacGyver will
take care of it like he always does.

If you want background, here's an old article. by peterwayner · 2002-05-31 01:33 · Score: 4, Informative

I wrote "Couch Wars" more than a year. It's a good introduction to the current world of satellite smartcard hacking.

http://www.wayner.org/books/f7.pdf

You're free to circulate it now because I've turned it into advertising ware for my latest two books Translucent Databases and Disappearing Cryptography .

If anyone has thoughts, comments, or suggestions, write me at p3@wayner.org.

Australians are the Smartest by aic · 2002-05-31 01:35 · Score: 1

It is interesting that both Murdoch and the company ERG come from Australia. ERG is a major player in smart card technology, and has big players on baord such as Visa, Amex and MasterCard. I wonder if the blunder, came from down under?

Great Mystery and the Consequences by s.a.m · 2002-05-31 01:45 · Score: 1

YOu know I haven't read such a riveting story in a while. That sounds soooo much like something you'd read out of a book or watch from a movie.

It's really interesting what has been able to happen and *IF* NDS is responsible for this and the death, the big question is WHY? Why risk everything? I guess they're going on the Risk it all and reap the biggest rewards.

And the part in the story saying that piracy helps their business and it's now just coming back to haunt them has me very intrigued. We always hear the RIAA complaining about these P2P services when an album comes out waaay before its supposed to be released.

Come on now, think about it, if you kept better tabs on what you're doing then this won't happen. But it always begs the question in light of this article, is there some truth to this rumour and will we see it come out in this court battle?

If it does come out, I wonder what this will mean for the other companies that do this.

pirating satellite by tswinzig · 2002-05-31 01:49 · Score: 2

If you're pirating satellite, you're still probably watching the ads!

--

"And like that ... he's gone."

This is what DMCA advocates... by freeBill · 2002-05-31 01:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

...should be concentrating on instead of Napster. A couple of good triple-damages laws, some rigorous enforcement (featuring rewards for turning in corporate hackers, backed by a good witness-protection program), and so elite flying squads kicking in the doors of corporate labs in Israel (those scanning electron microscopes are neither cheap nor easy to hide, and this problem disappears.

Either that or Newscorp disappears. Either way, a desireable outcome.

--
Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.

Re:This is what DMCA advocates... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 12:41 · Score: 0

And amazing the prosecution haven't bothered using the DMCA to fight this anyway, the anti- acketeering and trade secret provisions are their line of attack... kind of negates the need for the DMCA all together ;)

dr7.com by DrXym · 2002-05-31 02:08 · Score: 4, Informative

This link might help explore the background of this story.

Very US centric article by alistair · 2002-05-31 02:10 · Score: 5, Informative

This is a debate which has been raging in Europe, and especially in the UK for a number of months. Here in the UK, On Digital, later ITV digital, were in direct competition with Rupert Murdoch's SKY satellite services. Yet the suspicion was that millions were being lost by ITV digital by the sale of pirate smart cards, which by the end of the service could be picked up at most car boot sales for about ten pounds, yet would unlock all the premium rate channels for the service. Normally these guys sell dodgy 3rd generation videos, so how did they mange to crack technology which was equivelant in security to the triple DES algorithm?. The following articles from The Guardian offer more information.

How codebreakers cracked the secrets of the smart card and Murdoch security chief linked to TV piracy site.

The Guardian is a left leading broadsheet in the UK which carries influence beyond its half million (UK) circulation figure. Yet it even devoted an editorial to this subject whcih can be read here;

Breaking the code - Piracy on the digital airwaves.

Rupert Murdock? by SlamMan · 2002-05-31 02:16 · Score: 1

So NDS is owned by the Flash?

--
Mod point free since 2001

Satellite.... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 02:18 · Score: 0

And here I was clicking onto the story thinking it was all about the AUDIOGALAXY satellite...

There's another interesting aspect to this case. by c0mawhite · 2002-05-31 02:22 · Score: 2, Interesting

There's a little something else about this that's fishy.

In the UK there are/were four prominent pay-television services:

Sky Digital
ntl:digital
Telewest Broadband
(now deceased) ITV Digital (formerly onDigital)

ITV Digital shut up shop recently due to financial problems most people have attributed to their overinvestment in football broadcasting rights (my personal belief, having been an ITV Digital customer at one point) is that there was simply a lack of choice of good channels, but that's irrelevant).

Fundamentally, it's worth noting that SECA, the system employed by Canal Plus is also the same system that was employed by onDigital - as noted in this Google cache of Hackwatch. Cracks relevant to Canal Plus were also relevant to onDigital.

In the UK Sky Digital employ the OpenTV system as opposed to SECA. Companies who also follow in this vein are ntl:digital and Telewest Broadband.

This all poses some interesting questions.

Conspiracies, deaths, and shady characters, oh my! by bafu · 2002-05-31 02:51 · Score: 2

Included in the article are conspiracy theories, a suspicious death and a look at the shady characters working for both sides.

ah... the staple of most fun stories that don't go anywhere. I stopped watching X-Files a coupla years ago when it became apparent that there wasn't really much of a coherent larger story being told. Still, post-partum fans who go in for that sort of thing can use this satellite story as a fix, I suppose.

Re:There's another interesting aspect to this case by pacman+on+prozac · 2002-05-31 02:56 · Score: 1

And lets not forget the same Rupert Murdoch has just been allowed to bid for one of the five *main* channels in the UK (channel 5).

Kind of offtopic but the most interesting question posed to me by the whole UK digital TV fiasco is what the hell happened to non-subscription digital TV?

I remember all the hype about how they're planning on closing down non-digital terrestrial transmissions and move everyone onto digital reception (by 2005 was it?). Apparently in Scotland they recently started to advertise a digital decoder without smartcards but the only ones I can see on sale in the UK are subscription based deals.

There were quite a few extra digital channels that were non-subscription (there are even more now itv digital has gone under) so why is nobody selling a normal digital decoder box to watch them? It seems to me the only people with access to these channels are people who paid for ITV/ondigital boxes. Or is it just because I don't live in London or Manchester that we can't buy them.

It's also annoying how my friends in Holland get to watch bbc news 24 for free whereas I pay for it (tv license fees) and can't see it except in a 2" square at 2fps via their website (and I have to pay British Telecom for this pleasure).

Is digital TV going to help define ripoff Britain? I really hope not.

loss of freedom by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 02:58 · Score: 0

Freedom in America is dying. You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict the future of freedom in America. The hand writing is on the wall: America faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for it because freedom in America is dying. Things are looking very bad for liberty. As many of us are already aware, the DMCA threatens our liberty. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

Re:There's another interesting aspect to this case by c0mawhite · 2002-05-31 03:15 · Score: 1

> what the hell happened to non-subscription digital TV?

There were mutterings regarding the BBC trying to take on the licenses for digital broadcasting that onDigital/ITV Digital once held. I'm guessing this has something to do with limited throughput on a single multiplex.

All of this appears to have been delayed however, whilst the Broadcasting Commission wait to see if anyone else is interested in purchasing those licences.

This doesn't, however, get around the fact that we still have to pay TV licence fees.

> and can't see it except in a 2" square at 2fps via their website

On the subject of BBC News 24 - I still have my onDigital box. After cancellation ITV Digital said they'd come and collect it, but failed to turn up. The BBC channels are still coming through fine - including News 24. If you have an onDigital box anywhere and want to use it, it's still available for you.

SPEAKING OF "CANAL PLUS," PLEASE SEE MR. GOATSE.CX by Subject+Line+Troll · 2002-05-31 03:28 · Score: -1

n/m

Re:There's another interesting aspect to this case by pacman+on+prozac · 2002-05-31 03:42 · Score: 1

"All of this appears to have been delayed however, whilst the Broadcasting Commission wait to see if anyone else is interested in purchasing those licences."

ahh, waiting for ****echelon auto-munge**** to cough up the backhander eh ;)

On the subject of BBC News 24 - I still have my onDigital box.

yeah this is what I was getting at. The channels are being broadcast but unless you brought an ondigital box you can't actually see them. I was under the impression that the all the UK TV transmission was moving onto digital to free up bandwidth for mobile phone companies. So why can't I find a digital decoder anywhere except with a monthly subscription fee?

I may just be ranting pointlessly, I do live in the South-West so it may be that digital decoders are on sale but not here yet. Any other UK'ers seen a non-ITV/onDigial box on sale?

I kinda suspect that we're gonna end up having to pay the BBC's license fee's and a subscription fee to some digital provider just to get any TV.

Gee, now I'm really confused... by Bodhammer · 2002-05-31 03:57 · Score: 1

Doesn't Murdoch own Fox?

Isn't Fox one of the major proponents of Digital Copy protection and CBDTPA?

http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/

Things that make you go hmmm....

--
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

This presents me with quite a dilemma... by Art+Tatum · 2002-05-31 04:01 · Score: 2

To wit, who should I despise more? Rupert Murdoch? Or the French?

Re:This presents me with quite a dilemma... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-06-01 08:23 · Score: 0

Rupert Murdoch. The French aren't worth despising.

Re:There's another interesting aspect to this case by shippo · 2002-05-31 04:31 · Score: 1

You can now pick up decoder units for around £100 from places like Currys and Comet. There appear to be 2 separate manufacturers making these; Pace and someone else. These only went on sale during the past month or so.

Additionally there are new televisions available with in-built DV3 digital decoders that will also pick up all free-to-air channels.

A good capitalist doesn't trust corporations by JohnDenver · 2002-05-31 07:05 · Score: 2

When will we learn that the biggest threat to our liberty is not governments or corporations, but *CORRUPTION* of our legal framework and institutions.

Capitalism works very well with a solid legal framework and institutions that make running a business accessible. Without these key ingredients you have a recipe for a third-world country like many South American economies.

Today, Corporations have a lot of access and influence on our legal framework and institutions, so it's not surprising they use their influence to legislate and create bureaucracy advantageous to their interests.

Stop Beating up on Corporations, They employ us...

As much as corporation hating has become popular so has defending corporations. Taking one side or the other does nothing to address the real problem, let alone solve it, insofar as those problems root in the institutions and legal framework.

Arguing does nothing to address Rampant Corruption

This starts with every one of us. We need spread the word that corporation hating does nothing but start a backlash with people who have the same objectives we do, while corporation loving doing nothing to address the problem of rampant corruption. All of us want to preserve what made our economy great, and attack that which threatens the economy and our opportunities.

STRICT Anti-Corruption Measures may save Capitalism

I know campaign finance reform is one tiny start, maybe some of you can clue me on some other great ideas.

(Feel free to copy/rewrite/steal my ideas and call them your own, just try to improve on them)

--
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce

So, which really corrupts? by JohnDenver · 2002-05-31 07:09 · Score: 2

So, which really corrupts -- money, or power?

Kuro5hin had an interest article on this...
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/5/28/192548/033

--
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce

testimony from NDS by ebmedia · 2002-05-31 08:26 · Score: 0

this pdf is testimony from an NDS employee who is accused of actually posting the ZIP to DR7.com.

Why a US court? by n7ytd · 2002-05-31 08:33 · Score: 1

From the article, this is being heard in Federal court in San Francisco. NDS is a UK company, Canal+ is French, and Nagra is Swiss. So, why is this in a US Federal court? Granted, DirecTV and Echostar are US companies, but they are not involved in the suit... yet.

Re:Why a US court? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 15:16 · Score: 0

Because the infringement took place in NDS's US offices when the codes were sent and distributed to DR7.com, plus all the media shit is in that state, so you sue there.

Re:There's another interesting aspect to this case by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-31 15:12 · Score: 0

"So why can't I find a digital decoder anywhere except with a monthly subscription fee?"

The FTA is available without subscription, you can get a Pace FTV box for £89 here, not tied to any subscription charges (apart from the licence, obviously)

They should learn from the PC software bussiness by Bruj0 · 2002-05-31 17:00 · Score: 1

If they use a crackable device, they cant scream blody murder when somebody manages to crack it.
There is a reason why we have PKI and PGP.
Use the crypto Luke!
bruj0

--
http://securityportal.com.ar

Re:There's another interesting aspect to this case by pacman+on+prozac · 2002-06-01 03:22 · Score: 1

thanks man :)

Slashdot Mirror

Behind the Satellite Piracy Lawsuit

87 comments