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."

Comments

Well that's clever.

[Pinguu]

'hobbyists' research and discuss ways of hacking satellite TV

And they think police don't monitor the site? duh...

Transfer the domain?

[mr100percent]

Why would DirecTV want the domain? They have no rights to it. Now who's the pirate?

Or are they just throwing salt in the ground so that nothing grows back? (Anyone get that vague reference?)

Great...

[mossr]

Honestly, this is not the best use of the internet that I can think of. Sites like this will only aid those people/companies that are trying to ban everything under the sun with stuff like the DMCA.

I don't think it matters that DirecTV can't market their stuff in Canada - the Australian courts have ruled that online material is published in the nation of the reader (google for the recent Joe Gutnick defamation case heard in Australia about an online article published by a US newspaper). If the US courts see it the same (or DirecTV takes 'em on down under), they probably won't stand a chance (that's assuming it goes to court, obviously).

Personally, I think that running a site like this (and making money off it, too) is pretty darn irresponsible of the guy running it. It's kinda like waving a red rag at a bull, only you're a little kid that's tied to a stake in the ground and the bull is more of a homocidal maniac with a penchant for child-slaughter.

Re:Great...

[Crashmarik]

What the site seems to be about is free speach and unpopular free speach. If there is anything that interenet should be used its for the promotion of the free exhange of ideas.

I understand the point about companies using things like this to further justify the DMCA, but in truth it works the other way, just as easily. The more companies abuse the act, the more likely it is to be overturnded.

The problem is not the DMCA, its the arrogant attitude of large comapnies, that feel no one should have a right to step on their toes. Even before the DMCA you can be certain that Direct TV would have launched wave after wave of lawsuits against the operators. The point would have been to harrass them into submission.

Maybe someone can help me out here...

[Xebikr]

I just don't get how intercepting a signal that is located in my own yard, using equiptment that I own, that would just go into the dirt anyway, could be considered theft. Cable theft I can understand. They have physical equiptment that they own that is used to get the signal directly to my tv. The satellite signal is going to be there whether I use it or not.

Re:Maybe someone can help me out here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please. That tired argument is so dead. While you're at it, do you mind if I eavesdrop on your cell phone conversations? After all, I'm using my own equipment to intercept signals passing through my property.

If you don't pay for the service, you have no right to use the service. Enough said!

National Sovereignty

[pgrote]

What you forget it that the internet is the place where national sovereignty melts away.

Did you know that Direct TV cannot be bought in Canada due to law?
Direct TV in Canada?

There are only two sat companies in Canada recognized?
Canada doesn't recognize Direct TV

Here's another article
that explains the situation.

What you have is one country setting the laws for itself, but the internet crosses all national lines.

Instead of saying this is what the DMCA will be used for focus your efforts on the fact that the DMCA should be modified. Canada is doing us a favor.

Next on Slashdot...

[Geekenstein]

DirecTV sues Slashdot.org under the DMCA for linking to an illegal site...

Go ahead. Laugh. I tells ya it just might happen!

There's two sides to every coin

[jdhutchins]

It all comes down to the fact that if you're watchign their signals, they're not getting paid for it, and that causes a loss of profits. I don't know how their profits are doing, but if a company is starting to lose money, their first choice is to blame someone else and sue (SCO anyone?).
This is probably a gray area in the laws in the US. I'm sure some of the signals are copyrighted, so you're supposed to pay to use them. On the other hand, the signal's right there, so why not try to get at it? It's almost parallel to running Linux on the XBOX. It's there, why can't you do it? Because the company that created it doesn't want you to do it. That's why they want the DMCA.
The DMCA basically says that "if a company wants your money, they have a right to it", and here, DirectTV thinks they have a right to some money. Outside of the DMCA, however, I don't think this is well-definied in law, but IANAL.
On the other hand, don't go making a website devoted to cracking the signal. That's just asking for trouble. It'd be like if I started a website on how to pick car locks. It may be legal, but it may not be. It'd be different if they had made a name other than "Pirate's den", which is just asking for legal trouble.

Re:There's two sides to every coin

[Robber Baron]

...they're not getting paid for it, and that causes a loss of profits.

No it doesn't. Their signal is falling into Canada, where it is illegal for Canadians to purchase their signal therefore are not losing any more than they would if no-one in Canada tapped into their signal. The satellite transmitter cranks out the same signal whether 1 million people are watching or whether 2 million are. There is NO loss of profits because they can't make a profit in the Canadian market anyway! In any case, I have a hard time swallowing the "piracy equals loss" argument unless it can definitely be shown that piracy is encouraging individuals who otherwise had intent to purchase the service to help themselves for nothing. In fact the Canadian DirecTV situation is probably one of the best illustrations of a case where "piracy equals loss" is false.

I'm sure glad you're not an ISP...

[Kjella]

I just don't get how intercepting a signal that is located in my own yard, using equiptment that I own, that would just go into the dirt anyway, could be considered theft. Cable theft I can understand. They have physical equiptment that they own that is used to get the signal directly to my tv. The satellite signal is going to be there whether I use it or not.

I just don't get how intercepting a signal that is running through my own routers, using equiptment that I own, that just pass through as they would anyway, could be considered theft. Hacking the server I can understand. I have physical equiptment that I own that is used to get the signals directly. The data stream is going to be there whether I duplicate it or not. /sarcasm

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.

Kjella

Re:I'm sure glad you're not an ISP...

[arkanes]

Amusingly enough, your sarcastic reply is actually correct. It's certainly legal to snoop traffic that comes over your own routers.

Re:Can anyone say

[Lumpy]

Aiding and abetting someone to theft (of service) is still i believe a criminal offence, same as cloned cards,cable cubes etc.

I know you are a troll but I'll nail you to the wall anyways...

I have smartcard readers and writers, about 20 smartcards and assorted smartcard software. So this makes me a criminal? I use them for developing login/logout systems for linux (as well as with ibuttons) but by your standard I'm a criminal that needs to get 6000 years in prison and fined 30 gajillion dollars.. oh an let a mass morderer get only 5 years probation.. he only murdered people but I have the potential of stealing 900 quadrillion in profits form every company on the planet and magically launch all the nuclear missles...

Ok I'm blowing it way up... but I'm making a point... electronics are not criminal. owning equipment IS NOT CRIMINAL and electronic crim is not an offense that is worse than murder yet people like you and the politicians believe so.

Knowlege is power, CEO's and Governments dont like knowlege in the hands of the general public.

Re:What they forgot to mention

[evilviper]

DirecTV has introduced two unhackable access cards.

Wow! Now that is funny!

These new receivers detect this change and "flag" it as abnormal; DTV can detect this condition and send a technician to "check" on the setup

I don't see how... DirecTV is NOT two-way. The only way to send info back is through the phone-line, and you'd have to be a complete moron if you are hacking the DTV, and still keep the phone-line plugged-in.

Personally, I think the best way to do this is to get a DVB card for your PC, and work on the decryption key. NOT using DirecTV's reciever is the only way to do the job without the slightest risk of getting caught, or having your equipment exposed to the countermeasures.

Once again, PCs put the power back in the hands of the public.