Due to inaccurate address and phone number information provided to the Revdex.com by *** ***, NagraStar LLC and DISH Network L.L.Cdid not receive the correspondence concerning the complaint # *** regarding *** *** until December 3, The Revdex.com assigns an arbitrary hour
window to respond NagraStar reviewed the Revdex.com correspondence and the *** complaint as well as the underlying basis for samePer Revdex.com request, below is NagraStar’s response NagraStar is the leading provider of Conditional Access System (“CAS”) technologyCAS technology is used by NagraStar’s clients, including DISH Network in the United States and BellTV in Canada, as part of the digital security system that prevents against the theft of those clients’ servicesNagraStar also works with our clients to investigate and take legal action against individuals engaging in the circumvention of the CAS and resulting theft of copyright protected programming broadcast on our services Through one of our investigations, NagraStar discovered evidence that *** *** was engaging in the circumvention of NagraStar’s security technology and resulting theft of DISH programmingThe investigation revealed that Mr*** was utilizing the latest form of satellite piracy known as Internet Key Sharing (“IKS”) to perpetrate this theftPayment records were obtained during the investigation, in addition to email and a physical address linked to Mr*** in connection with his purchase of an illicit online service that provided decryption keys that allowed unauthorized circumvention of NagraStar’s CAS and resulting theft of DISH Network programming On June 29, 2016, NagraStar sent Mr*** a certified letter advising him of the evidence we had discovered and the legal claims we intended to pursue under the Federal anti-piracy statutes including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), U.S.Cet seq, the Federal Communications Act (“FCA”), U.S.Cet seq, and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“ECPA”), U.S.Cet seq Upon receipt of the pre-suit demand letter, Mr*** contacted NagraStar and spoke with five different investigator / analysts Each investigator /analyst provided Mr*** with the same information and documented the interaction for the file. Each time Mr*** refused to accept the information Each call initiated by Mr*** was a tactic designed to delay meaningful resolution of NagraStar’s claim. Mr*** admitted to purchasing the illegal service from an illegal website. Mr*** agreed to surrender the illegal equipment and did so. Mr*** threatened to file complaints with the Revdex.com and FTC if NagraStar did not reduce or withdraw its lawful claim for damages. NagraStar investigators had several additional calls with Mr*** between October through 27, During the course of the investigation, Mr*** was caught making several inconsistent statementsMr*** even admits he attempted to use the illegal equipment and illegal subscription by connecting to the DISH Network system. He states that he stopped using the illegal service and equipment when he found out that it was illegal. Through the investigation, Mr*** admitted to the purchase of the illegal service utilizing his credit card. Mr*** is currently entering a settlement agreement with NagraStar, which includes an agreed injunction prohibiting him from any further circumvention of NagraStar’s security technology and/or theft of NagraStar’s client’s services With respect to the dispute in Mr***’s consumer complaint that NagraStar’s pre-suit demand letter and the attempt to recover damages are not warranted. Mr***’s excuse is that he is innocent because he stopped using the illegal service after he was told it was illegal. Mr*** stated that his use of the illegal service and equipment does not match the amount the Nagrastar has calculated in damages. Pre-suit settlement demand letters for tortious conduct such as signal theft or piracy do not involve transactions within the scope of the FDCPA or analogous State statutes, and the underlying theft of programming does not constitute a consumer debt within those statutesSee, e.g., Zimmerman vHBO Affiliate Group, F.2d (3rd Cir1987) (holding that payment obligations arising from theft of television signals is outside the reach of the FDCPA because tort liability is not a transaction as defined by the statute)To be clear, there is no consensual consumer transaction between NagraStar and Mr***NagraStar’s claims against him, as outlined in the pre-suit demand letter, arise under the DMCA, FCA and ECPA based upon his circumvention of security measures and resulting theft of programming using an IKS pirate subscription serviceSee Coretti vLefkowitz, F.Supp(D.Conn1997) (“A claim arising out of an alleged theft does not constitute a ‘debt’ under the FDCPA‘[A]lthough a thief undoubtedly has an obligation to pay for the services he steals, the FDCPA limits its reach to those obligations to pay arising from consensual transactions….’”) (citations omitted) (quoting Bass vStolper et al, F.3d (7th Cir1997); See also DirecTV vCephas, F.Supp.2d (M.D.N.C2003) (granting DirecTV’s motion to dismiss defendant’s debt collection claim because theft of television services does not constitute a ‘debt’ within the scope of the statute); Turner M.Det al vCook, Esqet al, (9th Cir2004) (upholding trial court’s dismissal of FDCPA claim because the obligation to pay arose out of tortious conduct and not a consensual consumer transaction); Shorts vPalmer, F.R.D(S.D.Ohio 1994)(obligations to pay for shoplifted merchandise is not a ‘debt’ under the FDCPA; Plaintiff “never had a contractual arrangement of any kind with the defendant”) In light of the foregoing authority and factual background underlying this dispute, NagraStar respectfully requests that the Consumer Complaint File # *** be dismissed with prejudiceShould you have any further questions or need any additional information, please let us knowAs of the date of this submission, Mr*** agreed to a confidential Settlement Agreement and to retract this Revdex.com complaint *** ***, Manager of Field Security & Investigations
Due to inaccurate address and phone number information provided to the Revdex.com by *** ***, NagraStar LLC and DISH Network L.L.Cdid not receive the correspondence concerning the complaint # *** regarding *** *** until December 3, The Revdex.com assigns an arbitrary hour
window to respond NagraStar reviewed the Revdex.com correspondence and the *** complaint as well as the underlying basis for samePer Revdex.com request, below is NagraStar’s response NagraStar is the leading provider of Conditional Access System (“CAS”) technologyCAS technology is used by NagraStar’s clients, including DISH Network in the United States and BellTV in Canada, as part of the digital security system that prevents against the theft of those clients’ servicesNagraStar also works with our clients to investigate and take legal action against individuals engaging in the circumvention of the CAS and resulting theft of copyright protected programming broadcast on our services Through one of our investigations, NagraStar discovered evidence that *** *** was engaging in the circumvention of NagraStar’s security technology and resulting theft of DISH programmingThe investigation revealed that Mr*** was utilizing the latest form of satellite piracy known as Internet Key Sharing (“IKS”) to perpetrate this theftPayment records were obtained during the investigation, in addition to email and a physical address linked to Mr*** in connection with his purchase of an illicit online service that provided decryption keys that allowed unauthorized circumvention of NagraStar’s CAS and resulting theft of DISH Network programming On June 29, 2016, NagraStar sent Mr*** a certified letter advising him of the evidence we had discovered and the legal claims we intended to pursue under the Federal anti-piracy statutes including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), U.S.Cet seq, the Federal Communications Act (“FCA”), U.S.Cet seq, and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“ECPA”), U.S.Cet seq Upon receipt of the pre-suit demand letter, Mr*** contacted NagraStar and spoke with five different investigator / analysts Each investigator /analyst provided Mr*** with the same information and documented the interaction for the file. Each time Mr*** refused to accept the information Each call initiated by Mr*** was a tactic designed to delay meaningful resolution of NagraStar’s claim. Mr*** admitted to purchasing the illegal service from an illegal website. Mr*** agreed to surrender the illegal equipment and did so. Mr*** threatened to file complaints with the Revdex.com and FTC if NagraStar did not reduce or withdraw its lawful claim for damages. NagraStar investigators had several additional calls with Mr*** between October through 27, During the course of the investigation, Mr*** was caught making several inconsistent statementsMr*** even admits he attempted to use the illegal equipment and illegal subscription by connecting to the DISH Network system. He states that he stopped using the illegal service and equipment when he found out that it was illegal. Through the investigation, Mr*** admitted to the purchase of the illegal service utilizing his credit card. Mr*** is currently entering a settlement agreement with NagraStar, which includes an agreed injunction prohibiting him from any further circumvention of NagraStar’s security technology and/or theft of NagraStar’s client’s services With respect to the dispute in Mr***’s consumer complaint that NagraStar’s pre-suit demand letter and the attempt to recover damages are not warranted. Mr***’s excuse is that he is innocent because he stopped using the illegal service after he was told it was illegal. Mr*** stated that his use of the illegal service and equipment does not match the amount the Nagrastar has calculated in damages. Pre-suit settlement demand letters for tortious conduct such as signal theft or piracy do not involve transactions within the scope of the FDCPA or analogous State statutes, and the underlying theft of programming does not constitute a consumer debt within those statutesSee, e.g., Zimmerman vHBO Affiliate Group, F.2d (3rd Cir1987) (holding that payment obligations arising from theft of television signals is outside the reach of the FDCPA because tort liability is not a transaction as defined by the statute)To be clear, there is no consensual consumer transaction between NagraStar and Mr***NagraStar’s claims against him, as outlined in the pre-suit demand letter, arise under the DMCA, FCA and ECPA based upon his circumvention of security measures and resulting theft of programming using an IKS pirate subscription serviceSee Coretti vLefkowitz, F.Supp(D.Conn1997) (“A claim arising out of an alleged theft does not constitute a ‘debt’ under the FDCPA‘[A]lthough a thief undoubtedly has an obligation to pay for the services he steals, the FDCPA limits its reach to those obligations to pay arising from consensual transactions….’”) (citations omitted) (quoting Bass vStolper et al, F.3d (7th Cir1997); See also DirecTV vCephas, F.Supp.2d (M.D.N.C2003) (granting DirecTV’s motion to dismiss defendant’s debt collection claim because theft of television services does not constitute a ‘debt’ within the scope of the statute); Turner M.Det al vCook, Esqet al, (9th Cir2004) (upholding trial court’s dismissal of FDCPA claim because the obligation to pay arose out of tortious conduct and not a consensual consumer transaction); Shorts vPalmer, F.R.D(S.D.Ohio 1994)(obligations to pay for shoplifted merchandise is not a ‘debt’ under the FDCPA; Plaintiff “never had a contractual arrangement of any kind with the defendant”) In light of the foregoing authority and factual background underlying this dispute, NagraStar respectfully requests that the Consumer Complaint File # *** be dismissed with prejudiceShould you have any further questions or need any additional information, please let us knowAs of the date of this submission, Mr*** agreed to a confidential Settlement Agreement and to retract this Revdex.com complaint *** ***, Manager of Field Security & Investigations