Slashdot Mirror
Racketeering Suit Filed Against DirecTV
dki writes "Another attempt is being made to head off the lawsuits DirecTV has been filing against purchasers of smart-card programmers. This time, lawyers have filed suit under the mob-busting Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) federal organized crime statute, accusing DirecTV of organized extortion, money laundering and fraud. Background on the ongoing saga can be found here and here."
I'm glad someone has had the balls to do this. DirecTV is yet another extortion corporation like SCO. Demanding money to not file a lawsuit seems to be in style these days. Before you realise it, the US government will make it legal for these scumbag corporations to do an anal probe on you and you will have to pay up if you want to avoid being anal probed.
Wait a second, can this be good? If this goes bad for DirecTV, I may be forced to watch more of their damned commercials! They already time them on all channels so you can't escape their commercials. On the good side, their menu system beats em all hands down.
Please dont call previous slashdot articles "background information". This is not a news site, the articles are biased and often partially wrong or misleading, sometimes outright frauds.
/. ed's show some actual journalistic skill and integrity, or B) don't cite yourselves as a source for information.
Either A) have
So far....not quite. First, SCO hasn't actually approached any customers, though they've blustered that they might. So your first problem is, who's the plaintiff in this theoretical case? Second, they don't offer a settlement, they offer licensing - and amnesty from something (a possible suit) that hasn't even been established yet.
Yes, it's a fine line, but SCO's dancing it pretty well.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
For example, the RIAA sent an extortion letter to a professor for having a perfectly legal file on his website, just because the filename looked suspicious
No, they sent a cease and desist request. DirecTV is mailing out demands for settlement.
Frankly I dont see how this case can happen legally. If you default on a loan enough, you'll get a letter from the collection agency along with a subpoena, you can either pay up or go to court. In a legal sense, this isn't much different.
I AM, therefore I THINK!
That's totally fucking irrelevant assuming it's even true.
If they're hitting ANY non-pirates in their "dragnet", why the hell aren't they checking this stuff out before they send extortion letters?
So, not only are we supposed to accept that DirecTV is trying to act as both the executive and judicial branches of government by both serving the warrants and imposing a judgement in the form of a 3500.00 "fine", we're also supposed to say it's OK that they're arbitrary shooting is hitting innocent bystanders because they get the right target MOST of the time?
Jeezisfuckinchrist.... how long until America becomes a completely corporate-run state with a puppet government to speak for it, again?
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
Last week DirecTV sent me a new Smart Card, saying it was an important update or some such nonsense. But the card has a nasty EULA saying you can't reverse engineer, disassemble, etc. or look at it for too long.
So the card is sitting next to the box waiting for the old card to stop working. Hasn't yet.
Except that the basic cost is 8 to 10K to take it to Federal Court, that's if you win. Loose (or get out-motioned) and it could be astronomical. I'm sorry but individually the letters might have merrit but when you take a "threaten everyone and let god sort 'em out" stance with no reguard to the financial harm to innocent people there is something wrong with that. 10K to DTV may be easy to sneer at, but to someone who works for $60,000 a year, the cost to defend an unverified law-rape is pretty staggering.
The comment that It's just a few innocent people here and there is outrageous to me. One or two people forced into paying $3500 with no evidence they actually stole anything is unacceptable. If that's what the legal system allows for then it does need an awfully big overhaul.
Your comment shows lack of understanding. A lawsuit is often very expensive, and can be drawn out very easilier if you have deep pockets. The case may have no merits, but many people may not have the funds to see it to the end.
Essentially, it's an imbalance of power. A company comes to you and says: pays us or we will take you to court and bankrupt you, even though you are in the right.
Sounds like: give us money for no reason or we will cause you unjustified pain.
Sounds like extortion to me.
Circa 2001...
Roomate gets a DirectTV dish installed from her cousin (who coincidentally is an authorized dealer) He gives her a smartcard programmer, software, and everything she needs to reprogram her smartcard. Wife, seeing all the channels roomate has decides (against my judgement) that we should drop our cable for the same deal with "All the channels"
About a month later, the reciever goes out. Call too roomates cousin, "Oh they sent out a zap signal that fried your boxes firmware, no problem I can reprogram it" He comes over, takes the reciever apart, hooks up some hokey lookin dongle from his laptop, and after a few keypresses tada! It was working again!
Well, it wasn't just us that got it, my sister and brother in law got one too once they heard about the "free channels"
Too make a long story short, he had gotten about 10 of our friends and family with the smartcard programmer "hook" After a year of being in this contract with DirectTV we've all dumped our dishes and gone back to cable.
http://www.ibutton.com/
and just incase more ppl actually follow in story links then i belive ill mirror some basic info from the site:
What is an iButton?
The iButton(R) is a computer chip enclosed in a 16mm stainless steel can. Because of this unique and durable stainless steel can, up-to-date information can travel with a person or object anywhere they go. The steel button can be mounted virtually anywhere because it is rugged enough to withstand harsh environments, indoors or outdoors. It is durable enough to attach to a key fob, ring, watch, or other personal items and used daily for applications such as access control to buildings and computers.
iButton Components
The Can and Grommet
All iButtons use their stainless steel "Can" for their electronic communications interface. Each "Can" has a data contact which is called the "Lid" and a ground contact which is called the "Base". Each of these contacts is connected to the silicon chip inside. The "Lid" is the top of the "Can" and the "Base" forms the sides and the bottom of the "Can" and includes a flange for easily attaching the button to just about anything. The two contacts are separated by a polypropylene grommet.
The 1-Wire Interface
By simply touching each of the two contacts you can communicate to any of the iButtons by using our 1-Wire(R) protocol. The 1-Wire interface has two communication speeds. Standard mode at 16kbps and overdrive mode at 142kbps. See App. Note 74 for all 1-Wire Interface details.
The Address
Each iButton has a unique and unalterable address that is laser etched onto its chip inside the can. The address can be used as a key or identifier for each iButton.
2700000095C33108
From these basics we have expanded the iButton product line into over 20 different products by adding different functionality to the basic button. iButtons come in the following different varieties.
For those who read the original article in the Register, DirectTV was only going after people who had purchased their SmartCard programmer "from one of the equipment vendors shut down in the DMCA raids".
The same article (further down) appears suggest that the vendors in the DMCA raids were companies who's primary business was devoted to selling equipment to steal satellite TV programming
Here's the relevent quote from the article that suggests this: "...how innocent is someone who goes to website that is clearly identified as a pirate website that is devoted to selling equipment to steal satellite TV programming, and orders the equipment, knowing full well what they're getting?"
Is DirectTV going after people who purchased their SmartCard programmer from other places, or is it still just those consumers who were unfortunate enough to purchase their SmartCard programmer from the wrong company?
I'm not at all for a company going out and suing people for something in which the person is not guilty, at least without giving the person the benefit of the doubt.
As I see it, the problem is that DirectTV shut down some companies that, at least in DirectTV opinion, were advertising that their SmartCard programmers, if purchased, could be used to program a SmartCard in such a way as to enable the person to watch free DirectTV. DirectTV then took the customer list from the shut down companies and assumed that everyone who purchased a SmartCard programmer did it for the purpose of stealing satellite TV.
Now, if you were one of the customers of one of these companies, and you did purchase your SmartCard programmer to steal satellite TV, what are you going to do when DirectTV comes knocking? Are you going to fess up, or are you going to invent a cover story?
But assuming that everyone obtained their SmartCard reader for illegal purposes (and, hence, creates a cover story when DirectTV comes knocking) is assuming that everyone is guilty, and in DirectTV's case, without the possibility of being proven innocent.
It really gets me that DirectTV can do this - assume guilt without the possibility of being proven innocent. I thought the US justice system was based on the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Isn't the burden of proof on DirectTV to prove guilt of the defendant?
I'm amazed that they feel the need to resort to legal tactics to fix what is inherently a technical problem. In fact, it appears analogous to a technical problem solved by lock makers over 100 years ago. Problem: people can easily obtain blank "keys" to fit my device, and modify these keys to use for theft. Solution: go to the makers of the blanks (in this case smart card manufacturers) and have them design a non-standard form factor key for you, and promise not to sell said key to anyone else. Bingo! You've suddenly increased the cost of entry for bootlegging cards from $3500 for an off-the-shelf programmer to several hundred thosand dollars for equipment to design and manufacture custom smart cards. Added benefit: you no longer have to associate with all those lawyers!
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Everyone's blaming DirectTV because it's cheaper to settle the case for $3500 plus your smart card reader, than to hire a lawyer to defend yourself if you're innocent. Shouldn't we be instead placing the blame on the lawyers. There's nothing illegal about offering someone a settlement to avoid litigation, particularly when the evidence is compelling. You don't need to prove someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to file a complaint, only have some reasonable evidence. I don't consider suing someone who bought equipment advertized primarily for reprogramming DirctTV smart cards inherently wrong, because they're more than likely guilty. If they're not, they have the option to defend themselves in court. If they settle instead, that doesn't make it extortion. It's unfortunate that a reasonable settlement fee for a guilty party is less than the cost of defending yourself if you're innocent, but the lawyers are to blame for that, not DirectTV.
Vote for Pedro