Slashdot Mirror
DirecTV takes on PirateDen.com
IgD writes "Pirate's Den is a DirecTV hacking website based in Canada. The site features a very busy chat forum where 'hobbyists' research and discuss ways of hacking satellite TV. The site makes money by selling advertisements and subscriptions to the chat forum. The owner claims all he is engaging in is free speech. He does not appear to directly market circumvention devices. DirectTV doesn't agree however. They apparently are demanding the owner close the site, transfer the domain and pay a settlement fee. Another interesting twist to all this is the fact that DirecTV is not legally able to market its services in Canada. You can read more about this legal battle at FreedomFight.ca."
There are A LOT of people cracking these cards for many people here on a regular basis. So many of us pirate DTV it doesn't feel wrong. Whether it is or not I could give a fuck...
I remember Black Sunday when all the cards went down. Since then it has been more difficult to keep cards up and running.
DTV should bring a legit service to our country (Some say our Gov't wouldn't let them in...which is understandable. The CBC was created to keep Canadians from becomming "too American"). I bet a lot of people who are tired of paying a lot of money to have their cards re-activated would turn to the legit service if it was a resonable price.
Unless of course the porno channels are pay-per-view, then DirectTV would surely loose all their suscribers to pirates.
The DMCA is not law in Canada, and thus it doesn't matter if it is a circumvention device.
- jdrake
If you need the perfect example of that, you need not look any further than the police crackdown on protesters of the 1998 APEC summit in Canada. The quick summary is that protesters were sitting on a road where the president of Indonesia would be driving through when the cops came up to them, told them to leave. Literally the next second (the video proves this), one Sgt. Stewart of the Royal Canadian Mounted Chimps pepper sprayed the entire crowd. Many of the protestors had to be hospitalized. It is truly one of the most disturbing police actions in Canada in recent memory.
My point is, if people who lawfully assemble and then are given no realistic opportunity to disband when the police/government decide that they don't like what they've seen (because of the economic advantages that would've come due to Indonesia's human rights abuses no doubt), and the subsequent inquiry into the matter is basically a cover-up exercise by the pseudodictatorship in Canada with no punishment for any of the RCMP in question, I doubt the courts in Canada will rule any differently in this case here.
Top that off with mandated minimums of Canadian programming content for each station by the CRTC, and you see that Canada really isn't the place for free speech at all.
In case others didn't know, DTV (aka Dave) recently shutdown 63 dealer sites in a huge bust. You can check out their own enforcement page at hackhu.com (a former info site). They are also suing end-users at an alarming rate based ONLY on shipping records for standard ISO smartcard devices. It has actually gotten pretty out of control with intimidation letters and complaints in the amount of $10,000. Lots of people don't even know they've been sued (many people have moved in the 2 years it's taken DTV to sue them). People are getting default judgements against them for the full amount request by DTV. Florida has been particularly hit hard with THOUSANDS of cases. I urge everyone to stay informed about this, because once again, they use the veil of the DMCA as justification for their efforts. Some of these people are being sued for buying a completely legitamate ISO7816 device that can be used for millions of other things than just DTV hacking. Check out http://www.legal-rights.org/ for more info on DTV legal info. I also have a forum section dedicated to the DTV legal battles with up to date lists of who has been sued and in what state. There is no discussion of hacking there.
forums.wumarkus.com
To anyone who has received an intimidation letter or summons, GOOD LUCK!
Here is an example of DirecTV taking a "hacking" website's domain name and what they do with it. It has also been rumored in the past that they'll take ownership of some of the hacking hardware sellers' sites and set up their own sting operation, but I personally haven't seen confirmation of that.
Well here is the great part about Canada....
:)
Directv wants here, however they would like to own the rights to the "sky". The CRTC has said no, and now Directv is just a little on the upset side. It was told to them that if they could not block the satellite signal to Canada, well too bad, so sad, so to speak. It is not illegal to have Directv, just to sell it, and that being on a federal level, and that must be enforced by the RCMP, and they have more important things to be concerned about then who steals whos TV. Sorry for the run on sentence there.
However there is a catch, companies like, Rogers Cable, Bell Canada, (Bell ExpressVU) and Star Choice, (another satellite provider)would like it made completely illegal on all levels, so they can increase their share of the market. However, if it was made illegal, would I go out and pay for TV, sorry folks no chance
In regards to paying for it, yes, if you have Directv, and pay for it through an American account, that is considered to be the gray market and yes, that is illegal, however, when you can take it for nothing, then why not ??
Give me a break. You have as little right to hack satellite transmissions as you have to spy on military communications, cell phones, wireless keyboards, mouses and headphone, garage door openers, the EM emissions of my screen or anything else that happens to run across your airspace.
Well I hate to break it to you, but according to the Canadian CRTC, I have exactly those rights! If it's in the air it's fair game...why do you think the military encrypts their shit? It doesn't become illegal until I tell someone else about the contents of what I intercepted! Interception is not illegal in Canada...OTOH dissemenation and distribution of intercepted content...well that's a different matter.
You're using her as bait, Master!
It used to be "legal" to buy Direct TV in Canada several years ago. many peopel who winter six months of the year in Florida woudl simply bring thier systems back to home to Canada with them. Other people, often those who lived in the country where no cable TV was available, who drive into the US (approx: 90% of all Canadian live within 200 miles of the US boarder)and buy a setup, and start payments direclty off thier credit card. Everybody turned a blind eye, and while there was some hacking going on, it was just easier to pay for it out right. When the government in Canada made it illegal to buy Direct TV, thousands of Canadian with US satelite systems were screwed. Remember too, that the small dish systems came out int he USA about 3 years before a similar system was ready in Canada, so there was demand bu no supply. After "banning" Direct TV, that's when the hacking industry came out full bloom. the problem is, there are more hacked cards in New York City alone than in all of Canada, and if the hacking was going on only in Canada, Direct TV probally wouldn't care. But too many of the hackers make thier real money selling to the USA, which really PO's Direct TV (and right fully so). The interesting thing why many peopel get the US dish in Canada is for programming not available in Canada. For exmaple, the CRTC here in Canada willnto allow Fox News here - talk about censorship! Whatever you think of Fox news, the point i, we can watch Sex TV openly on local TV, but the O'Reilly report ot too dangerous for Candains to watch. Go figure? Oh yes, the other channel "banned" in Canada - Turner Classic Movies. :)
A site that DirecTV took over, www.hackhu.com better explains their intensions. Infact, DirecTV has take about 100 sites and made them anti-hacking sites like the one above.
Sorry bud, but the other year the Supreme court "re-read" section 9.1(c) of the Radio Telecommunications Act that allowed hacking of non-authorised services to mean authorised by anyone (which, technically, means that if you write "authorised" on the piece of paper, it's authorised).
It sucks, but it's true. When it comes to big business (ie: Bell ExpressVu) the Supreme Court has no problems rewriting laws, rather the letting the government do it.
At the moment the law resides in this domain:
- Being caught actively hacking the service is illegal (ie: police find a pirate card in your receiver).
- Being caught with hacking tools is a grey area. You'll probably get prosecuted, but you could win, maybe.
- Buying "hacking tools" that aren't programmed for hacking already is, in general, legal, considering they all have alternate uses (however minor). Of course, the problem is, can you be sure the store doesn't sell any pre-programmed stuff? Because, if they do, and if they're caught, it'll be assumed you bought yours pre-programmed.
- Discussing hacking methods is definitely legal, but certainly would be enough to get the RCMP suspicious of you.
IANAL, and don't take that as legal advice. Oh, and be smart, build the stuff yourself. An ISO-7816 programmer only takes one chip...
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
So, the moral of the story is, don't bother getting into this mess (I'm glad I never did), because the game will be over soon.
Actually Canada does have a constituational guarantee for free speech.
It's in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter
It's considered a fundamental freedom.
Perhaps your thinking of the British north America act of 1867 which was the constitution (basically an extention of the British constitution) originally, however this was changed in 1982 when Canada made it's constitution a piece of it's own legislation rather and a British one.
It is true however that any right within the charter of freedoms can be overuled in law, however such laws must be passed with a 70% and must be re-voted upon every 4 years.
The only time this has happened with the right to freedom of expression, as far as I know, was in Quebec with it's language laws, but those laws were overturned a few years back due to a failed re-vote
Canadian RadioCommunications Act
9. (1) No person shall
(c) decode an encrypted subscription programming signal or encrypted network feed otherwise than under and in accordance with an authorization from the lawful distributor of the signal or feed;
10. (1) Every person who
(b) without lawful excuse, manufactures, imports, distributes, leases, offers for sale, sells, installs, modifies, operates or possesses any equipment or device, or any component thereof, under circumstances that give rise to a reasonable inference that the equipment, device or component has been used, or is or was intended to be used, for the purpose of contravening section 9,
(2.1) Every person who contravenes paragraph 9(1)(c) or (d) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable, in the case of an individual, to a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both, or, in the case of a corporation, to a fine not exceeding twenty-five thousand dollars.
Exception
(2.3) No person who decodes an encrypted subscription programming signal in contravention of paragraph 9(1)(c) shall be convicted of an offence under that paragraph if the lawful distributor had the lawful right to make the signal available, on payment of a subscription fee or other charge, to persons in the area where the signal was decoded but had not made the signal readily available to those persons.
May I direct your attention to the word LAWFUL. In every court case in Canada save one, distributors of DTV receivers, cards, etc. won handily because their activities involved a service that has no lawful distributor in Canada. DTV is not licensed in Canada and never will be due to our strict Canadian content laws (some call it censorship but what it really amounts to is a quota of domestic TV over foreign broadcasts, the content is not at issue per se).
Now, the Supreme Court threw a curve ball when it ruled in April 2002 that the law provided a blanket prohibition on decoding signals from ANY source. Prior to this the law was in favor or decoding signals from someone other than a lawful source as every court decision came down in favor of the satellite dealers, so the decision was a bit of surprise. The ruling was limited in scope to the communications act itself not the act under the Charter of Rights, our version of the Bill of Rights, and that issue remains to be ruled on.
So, I would submit that while the decoding of DTV in Canada is technically illegal (for the time being pending the constitutional outcome) talking about decoding a signal is a far different matter. Contrary to what anyone here has said, Canada has very strong free speech protections. Under our Charter of Rights any interference with your right to free speech must be justified and the onus is on the government to prove that its intentions are not contrary to a "free and democratic society", limited to the dimishment of certain act, proportional, etc. The bar is quite high. DTV starts out in a losing position since by the interpretation of our Charter by the Supreme Court, Pirate's Den is protected speech, in fact all speech is protected. If you read our Supreme Court decisions they say this in pretty much plain english. Of course I am not a lawyer, but even a lay person can read a court decision and understand what they are saying. We shall see...