Does DTV really care? [Archive]

Doug Brott

11-21-07, 09:07 AM

Does Digital Television Care? No, it is a technolgoy.
-------------

As for DirecTV... yes they do care.
And there was time that they actively enforced the phone line connections.

If they find out (somehow) that someone is doing that, they have procedures to invalidate the access cards, and require them all to be re-validated.

I have 10 active receivers on my account (all in my house). so 5/6 is not uncommon now adays.

As for the installers... they just hook them up and add them to the account, it is rarely the case that DirecTV will have them "audit" all the other receivers.

Earl,

When I utilized the "mover's program" back in 2005 the guy that installed the new dish on my roof audited each of my receivers .. even the ones that I wasn't ready to turn back on yet. I had 4 receivers at the time (now up to 6 :)). All was good, but it definitely got audited even though that's not what he told me.

The funny thing is that this particular installer was probably the worst of the three that have visited my house in the past three years. He was thorough and the job was not that bad .. just not as good as the other two.

Lord Vader

11-21-07, 09:15 AM

Does Digital Television Care? No, it is a technolgoy.
-------------

I have 10 active receivers on my account (all in my house). so 5/6 is not uncommon now adays.

I know what you mean. I've got 13 receivers in my place, which to many might seem impossible. But heck, 4 of them alone are in my living room connected to my A/V and HDTV! That's almost 1/3 of all the receivers I've got.

I admit that if DLB was here, and if I didn't extract recordings from my HR10-250s and HDVR2s to burn to DVD, I'd deactivate half my receivers most likely, because the main reason why I keep so many active is due to the two aforementioned features.

boba

11-21-07, 09:22 AM

I know of at least 4 different families that live in my area that are activating 5 and 6 receivers at their homes and then moving them to other family members houses and sharing the bill. I know that this has got to impact what DTV has to charge the honest customers in some way. But DTV doesn't seem to care. I even know one guy that has 8 receivers activated at his single wide trailer. He just brags about it and said that the DTV Installers just hooked them up. What do you guys say?If it bothers you call 1-800-531-5000 ask for signal integrity and report them.:)

braven

11-21-07, 09:30 AM

If it bothers you call 1-800-531-5000 ask for signal integrity and report them.:)

+1

We have a winner!

Greg Alsobrook

11-21-07, 09:35 AM

in the famous words of Justin Timberlake.... what goes around comes around :)

Doug Brott

11-21-07, 09:36 AM

If it bothers you call 1-800-531-5000 ask for signal integrity and report them.:)

Yes, this would be a good choice if you are certain of the situation ..

projectorguru

11-21-07, 09:39 AM

I know of at least 4 different families that live in my area that are activating 5 and 6 receivers at their homes and then moving them to other family members houses and sharing the bill. I know that this has got to impact what DTV has to charge the honest customers in some way. But DTV doesn't seem to care. I even know one guy that has 8 receivers activated at his single wide trailer. He just brags about it and said that the DTV Installers just hooked them up. What do you guys say?

The sad thing is, this happenes more than most people think

Stuart Sweet

11-21-07, 09:45 AM

I'm sad to say I'm aware of this happening around me. I do my best to encourage people to do the right thing, but some people think "sticking it to the man" is their right and privilege.

I've also been asked to participate in this, and turned it down.

Greg Alsobrook

11-21-07, 09:48 AM

it's sad that people do this... most of these people would never walk into target and stick a cd in their pocket/purse... but do this and don't view it as stealing...

ProfLonghair

11-21-07, 10:03 AM

...I have 10 active receivers on my account (all in my house). so 5/6 is not uncommon now adays...

Can I stay at your house?

projectorguru

11-21-07, 10:10 AM

it's sad that people do this... most of these people would never walk into target and stick a cd in their pocket/purse... but do this and don't view it as stealing...

Well you hit the nail on the head, I know a person who does this, and I confronted them about it, and this guy has a relative who is a lawyer, and according to him is isn't, and isn't punishable by the local laws, i don't know the details, but I do know the installers knew what he was doing as well, and hooked it up anyway, alot of people do this in the cities, its really not uncommon, although I think it is wrong, and wouldn't do it myself

wavemaster

11-21-07, 10:15 AM

I think the enforced phone line costs them more new subs than pilferage from old.

I have a REC in the garage and don't have a PL out there so we used to have to take that one in the house every few months to make a call. We haven't needed to since it was upgraded to the HR20.

If they could ID the dish then they could tie it all together. Even accounts that have 2 or more dishes could still be accounted for. They could also have an intelligent box that you install between the dish and the multi that could tie them all together.

Doug Brott

11-21-07, 10:16 AM

It certainly violates your service agreement and could be construed as a violation of the DMCA which criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control. This is, of course, a federal law so it is possible that it isn't punishable by local laws.

K4SMX

11-21-07, 10:19 AM

Yes, this would be a good choice if you are certain of the situation ..
Please, let's resist becoming a "snitch society." Let's just all mind our own business, as Stuart does.

richiephx

11-21-07, 10:21 AM

I thought that the newer receivers talked to each other?

Greg Alsobrook

11-21-07, 10:32 AM

Please, let's resist becoming a "snitch society." Let's just all mind our own business, as Stuart does.

it's not about being a snitch... it's about doing the right thing... and I think Stuart was referring to not participating in the STEALING... if someone was stealing from your home or business... and I knew who it was... wouldn't you want me to tell you??

gregjones

11-21-07, 10:37 AM

Please, let's resist becoming a "snitch society." Let's just all mind our own business, as Stuart does.

When their theft increases my prices, it's my business. Everyone that pays their bills legally is subsidizing the cost of those receivers.

CTJon

11-21-07, 11:35 AM

Does Digital Television Care? No, it is a technolgoy.
-------------

And you thought there was confusion calling it D*?

randyk47

11-21-07, 11:59 AM

I don't personally know of anybody who does this and I'd personally not be involved in such. Part of that is my job. I work for the government and I'm not about to get involved in some shady arrangement and risk my job.

K4SMX

11-21-07, 12:01 PM

it's not about being a snitch... it's about doing the right thing... and I think Stuart was referring to not participating in the STEALING... if someone was stealing from your home or business... and I knew who it was... wouldn't you want me to tell you??
No, unless you are a personal acquaintance of mine and have that additional level of responsibility. Otherwise, you should mind your own business and assume I will mind mine.
When their theft increases my prices, it's my business. Everyone that pays their bills legally is subsidizing the cost of those receivers.
There is no evidence of any association between theft-of-service and pricing. DirecTV is not a regulated monopoly. There will always be rationalizations for snitching and spying on your fellow citizens. It is very common in all totalitarian societies. Keeping your own side of the street clean is a better model than reporting on your neighbor, your neighbor's kids, your neighbor's dog, etc. This is the American way.

Mike728

11-21-07, 12:34 PM

Greg Alsobrook

11-21-07, 12:38 PM

No, unless you are a personal acquaintance of mine and have that additional level of responsibility. Otherwise, you should mind your own business and assume I will mind mine.

So, if I saw someone attacking one of your family members, you would like it if I just minded my own business?

well... i see what you're saying... that is a bit different than theft... but i still don't agree with what he is saying...

here is a better scenario... in the parking lot of a department store... someone busts out your car window... takes your personal belongings... jumps in a car... and takes off.... now... i have the tag number... should I not give it to you so you can pass it on to the police in hopes of recovering your valuables??

TigersFanJJ

11-21-07, 01:12 PM

Earl,

When I utilized the "mover's program" back in 2005 the guy that installed the new dish on my roof audited each of my receivers .. even the ones that I wasn't ready to turn back on yet. I had 4 receivers at the time (now up to 6 :)). All was good, but it definitely got audited even though that's not what he told me.

The funny thing is that this particular installer was probably the worst of the three that have visited my house in the past three years. He was thorough and the job was not that bad .. just not as good as the other two.

My guess is that he probably wasn't auditing your receivers. More than likely, his workorder called for installing all six receivers, so he got the info on the other two in order to get paid more for the install.

wavemaster

11-21-07, 01:27 PM

here is a better scenario... in the parking lot of a department store... someone busts out your car window... takes your personal belongings... jumps in a car... and takes off.... now... i have the tag number... should I not give it to you so you can pass it on to the police in hopes of recovering your valuables??

Not to defend the thiefs but this is a mile off from reality.

I call DirectTV and get 3 boxes. I pay for them monthly.

One of them ends up at my brothers. He didn't steal it, I provided it to him.

I "the original" sub violated my contract. The brother has no contract.

There is no violence, no raping, no smashing windows etc. Also DirectTV is being paid for it, just not their full rate.

If my neighbors wife is sunbathing in the front yard nude, should I report her? I know if anyone on the street found out who did report her then there would be violence (she's hot). To me this is a liberty issue.

Now if I saw her under attack not only would it be reported, there is a good chance I would get there with a gun and stop the situation or kill the guy before help could actually arrive, and I would. This is a human rights or property rights issue.

So I'm all in favor of reporting/killing the rapists of the world but when the neighbor wants to smoke a doobie in his house, I don't see where it's any of my business.

In DirectTV's case specifically, it's their job to insure that theft is kept at bay. Hence the access cards, marrying boxes, activation etc.

Here's a question. Let's say they could PROVE and collect on everyone doing it. Lets even say it's 100 Million a month more revenue added to the 1.6Bil there already. How much is your bill going to go down? Would your bill go down, or would their profits just increase? Being an American business owner I would bet on the ladder - lol.

Greg Alsobrook

11-21-07, 02:01 PM

i see your point... but i still think that something like stealing cable (or in this case satellite) should be reported... it's just not fair.... it is STEALING... no matter how you slice it... you are getting something that you are not paying for (or full price for)...

there is a fine line between what to report and where to just mind your own business... if I knew my neighbor was smoking weed... would I call the cops... probably not... but if he was growing the weed... you bet I would...

wavemaster

11-21-07, 02:25 PM

if I knew my neighbor was smoking weed... would I call the cops... probably not... but if he was growing the weed... you bet I would...

It's funny how people see things in totally different ways. At first I thought well of course you would turn him in for that...... but then I thought about it a little more.

If I knew he was buying it on the corner from a dealer vs. growing for his own use, I would be even less inclined to call for using it to begin with. By growing his own, he eliminates all the crime of the channel. No big shipments coming in (no DEA being shot at), no regional shipments (no local and state agents being shot at), no local turf wars - (kids cops everyone loses with that).

The more I think about it the more inclined I would be to thank him for reducing the problems of society - LOL.

To me this is "what you do at your place is your issue". As much as I hate (and I'm to young to hate anything) what some of my neighbors do, I totally respect their rights to do it, in the same way I defend my own.

K4SMX

11-21-07, 04:59 PM

Ah, we're getting there now. We have to distinguish between a nation of people snitching to and spying for the "authorities" on their fellow citizens for alleged petty crimes versus the well-established right of citizens to prevent, with force if necessary in some circumstances, felonies against persons or their personal property, especially when they're in their home or what has been determined in many states to be an extension of their home, i.e., their automobiles.

If we simply draw the line at felonies against persons or their property versus non-violent misdemeanors, we'll be pretty close to having a rule of thumb at things we may or may not want to become involved with on someone else's behalf in order to maintain a civil society.

pouchgrab

11-21-07, 05:10 PM

This is my take on it. I believe the AVERAGE household is willing to spend around $60-$75 a month for TV. When you get 2 people sharing service they probally order the Premium Package instead of a cheaper one and split the cost. DTV gets paid for the cost of buying the additional receivers and the additional $5 a month to keep them activated, and possibly a customer that might be doing cable but switches to DTV because they feel like their getting a good deal. DTV is still making additional money in the long run.

JLucPicard

11-21-07, 05:45 PM

But if three brothers, with their wives and kids, live in three different houses and are all piggy-backing off of one DirecTV account, there is less money being paid to DirecTV than if each of the brothers had their own account with DirecTV, which is how it is laid out in the Customer Agreement.

I don't know if it's an urban legend (quick check of Snopes yielded no results), but my sister was telling me a couple years ago that pizza delivery guys would check out peoples' cable set-ups as they were waiting for payment and if they had a pirate box, the pizza guy would notify Comcast. Even if not true, the industry doesn't just sit back and tolerate cable/satellite theft.

Ken S

11-21-07, 06:07 PM

Do all of these people "sharing" service pay for dish installs? It would seem that if DirecTV subsidizes the cost of their dish they would know of any that were purchased/installed and then not activated.

richiephx

11-21-07, 06:11 PM

When their theft increases my prices, it's my business. Everyone that pays their bills legally is subsidizing the cost of those receivers.

and, everyone that pays their bills legally is subsidizing the programming costs for other people too. :)

RobertE

11-21-07, 06:19 PM

I wonder if a audit system similar to Dish will make an appearence in the future.

Gotta love some of the double standards that get posted. People want everything to the letter of the law when its in their favor (against the man), but when it's the other way around, the moral compass looses direction. :( :mad:

lwilli201

11-21-07, 07:04 PM

I do not think I could find 2 or 3 people I would trust enough to pay their part every month. If they have no problem with getting programming at a much reduced price, they would have no problem not keeping their part of the bargain. You could deactivate their receivers, but you are on the hook for the receivers. Not a pretty picture.

cweave02

11-21-07, 07:13 PM

Shoot, it is taking me an act of congress to get my parents a system for Christmas and have them bill it to me! I am wanting to have it installed while I am here (in VA) for the holiday weekend, so we will see. My mother is a college basketball fanatic, so I got her the ESPN Full Hoops package.

Yes, I am definitely a Appalachan American, and proud of it!

gulfwarvet

11-21-07, 07:53 PM

my 2 cents worth on this,
first off steeling is steeling no matter how much people trend to sugar coat it. also if my neighbor was growing his "own" weed for himself. yes i would call the 5-0 on his a.s faster than lighting could strike. for if i knew about it, that would mean any child would also.

now the theory on sticking it to the man?

hum, as a Veteran i know all to well how i would love to do it to the man. for i have getting screwed since day one fighting the VA system. but i did NOT defend this country, get injured, have multiple surgeries, and mental flashbacks for the "common criminal". Now i did defend this Country for the honest hard working people that makes this country so Great.

ThomasM

11-21-07, 08:27 PM

The "old" DirecTV got a really bad image on many internet sites as well as word-of-mouth back when their access card/encryption system was being compromised by folks using "card readers/writers". Paying customers (like me) were irked that a lot of people were getting ALL the channels for free (without even a subscription of any kind!)

So DirecTV instead of using technology (then) to block the theft decided that ANYONE who bought a smartcard reader/writer did so just to defraud DirecTV! And, amazingly enough, they managed to get a bunch of courts and judges to go along with it and PROSECUTE folks just for buying one of these devices!! Not only that, the technical people at DirecTV were a bunch of cocky morons. They developed a thing called a "silver bullet" which was just a signal sent over the satellite to permanently disable the access cards of folks getting the service for free. Now for the "cocky" part. After the so-called silver bullet hit the access cards of the thieves, it changed the first bits on the card to spell out the words "GAME OVER" which REALLY irked the techies!! And they sent it right before a Super Bowl telecast for a little cherry on the sundae. It became known as "black Sunday" in the annals of getting pay TV for free.

As for the "moron" part, it took the irked techies only two weeks to be back in business. How? By "fooling" the DirecTV receiver into thinking an access card was plugged into it while in reality it was hooked to a computer with the access card info in RAM. Silver Bullet? No problem, it's RAM-just refresh it!

This went on for about a year while meanwhile DirecTV was suing the sh-- out of NDS which developed the access card system. Finally, they hired a bunch of INTELLIGENT engineers and completely redesigned the access card software as well as producing a new generation of access cards in house. It was called generation 4 and it cost them a bundle to send out replacement cards to every subscriber.

Now, piracy via access card tampering is virtually non-existent but a lot of subscribers haven't forgotten the fiasco. Back then, if you had multiple receivers, and they weren't all plugged into the same landline phone line you got about 2 months before the phone rang and you were told you would be paying full price for each receiver. End of story.

A lot of legitimate customers got irked and went to DISH, whose access cards have never been compromised. A lot of customers went back to cable. Meanwhile, a lot of customers disconnected their landline phone in favor of going 100% cellular. Others bought their equipment and just didn't bother installing a phone jack near each receiver and when they got the ultimatum phone call they just said "stick it!".

With the advent of Mr. Murdoch and the demise of Hughes as the controlling interest, things changed. The "lease" routine started. The "programming commitment" routine started. They even went back to NDS and had them design the R15. (maybe that's why it never worked right for the first 2 years) And the customer agreement even got changed so it did NOT state that accounts with more than one receiver not connected to the same phone line would be charged full price after a short time. If you check the current version, the section on the phone line connection (1f) still says you have to connect all receivers to the same land-based phone line, but it also says "If we detect that any receiver is not regularly connected to a land-based telephone line, we may investigate and, if it is determined that the receiver is not at the location identified on your account, we may disconnect the receiver or charge you the full programming subscription price for the receiver"

An awful lot of "we may"s instead of the old "hard line" policy. I get the picture that there actually ARE a goodly number of honest customers with multiple receivers at the same address but no phone line connection. In fact, a friend of mine is just such a subscriber. She lives out in the middle of nowhere and finally had her outrageous-priced landline disconnected now using only her cell.

However, "clever" people decided to sock it to 'em and raise the price for all the honest customers by distributing their receivers to friends & relatives and splitting the bill. How are they going to be stopped? Stupidity. Sooner or later, their dish will need alignment or their box will need service and wifey will call DirecTV not knowing that hubby set everything up for free.

And I'll bet DirecTV has a few tricks up their sleeve, too.

Way back before DirecTV, a good friend of mine worked for a cable company in northern Illinois. He explained to me that lots of customers were getting free service by buying illegal decoders. So they hatched a clever plan. They took one of the local over-the-air channels which were given to all customers without scrambling and scrambled it in a special way. Before they did this, they sent a command to all the legitimate boxes telling them NOT to turn on their descrambler. But the illegal boxes saw the scrambling signal and tried to decode it (even though it WASN'T scrambled). The result looked like you took the brightness control on your TV and turned it all the way up. They did this just when a very popular soap opera came on so all the wives were watching. Soon, the phones lit up with complaints of a "really bright" picture and out went the trucks to bust the crooks. HA HA!

So don't worry. Sooner or later your crooked neighbors will get their just dues.

Lord Vader

11-21-07, 08:33 PM

Not only that, the technical people at DirecTV were a bunch of cocky morons. They developed a thing called a "silver bullet" which was just a signal sent over the satellite to permanently disable the access cards of folks getting the service for free. Now for the "cocky" part. After the so-called silver bullet hit the access cards of the thieves, it changed the first bits on the card to spell out the words "GAME OVER" which REALLY irked the techies!!

This is totally false. It is an urban legend that never happened. Period.

Now, piracy via access card tampering is virtually non-existent but a lot of subscribers haven't forgotten the fiasco. Back then, if you had multiple receivers, and they weren't all plugged into the same landline phone line you got about 2 months before the phone rang and you were told you would be paying full price for each receiver. End of story.

Not true. Ever since subscribing with DirecTV in the 1990s, many of my receivers were never connected to phone lines for logistical reasons, and I never received such phone calls. DirecTV didn't go around calling their customers with such threats.
A lot of legitimate customers got irked and went to DISH, whose access cards have never been compromised

Another falsehood. In fact, DISH's cards to this day are still compromised (most versions of their ROM cards are). Their cards in the long run have been less secure than DirecTV's.

You really should stip spreading rumors around of this sort. First, they're many years old. Second, they're just not true.

ThomasM

11-21-07, 08:40 PM

This is totally false. It is an urban legend that never happened. Period.

Another falsehood. In fact, DISH's cards to this day are still compromised (most versions of their ROM cards are). Their cards in the long run have been less secure than DirecTV's.

The information I presented was culled from many, many web sites at the time. Of course, I personally wasn't involved in stealing DirecTV's signal, so I guess in a court of law you could call my post "heresay".....

Lord Vader

11-21-07, 08:42 PM

Such web sites should be taken with a grain of salt, to say the least. Those are the WORST places from which to get reliable information regarding this issue. They were run by the pirates who loved to spread around fantastic stories.

carl6

11-21-07, 09:06 PM

I'm sure that DirecTV uses some method of account auditing, combined with phone line response, combined with other factors, to keep account sharing to reasonable limits. That is, of course, a cost of doing business, which is part of the total cost passed on to all customers.

I do find it a little unsettling that a large percentage of our population feels that it is okay to "push the limits", whether it be speeding, running red lights, creative accounting on their tax return, or shtealing cable or satellite services. I'm not sure where this unabated sense of priviledge comes from - the rules apply to everyone else, but not to me. Hogwash.

Is it okay to turn your head and ignore one crime, but report another? Then you start the sliding scale of "well, that isn't really all that bad", or "everyone does it", etc. Gradually the level of "acceptable wrongness" grows. What was unthinkable a decade ago is acceptable today. What is unthinkable today could very well become the acceptable standard a decade from now.

I do not agree that we should ignore criminal activity when we see it. It is fairly common to see a news report about how someone who was doing something very wrong was caught because they were caught or reported for something much less. The person who is willing to steal satellite service is willing to commit other crime.

Please don't make me aware that you are doing it if you don't want me to report it.

Carl

ThomasM

11-21-07, 09:12 PM

I do not agree that we should ignore criminal activity when we see it. It is fairly common to see a news report about how someone who was doing something very wrong was caught because they were caught or reported for something much less. The person who is willing to steal satellite service is willing to commit other crime.

Please don't make me aware that you are doing it if you don't want me to report it.

Carl

+1

A local man was bragging to his neighbor that the natural gas used to run his swimming pool heater didn't go through his meter so it was "free". The neighbor was not amused and turned him in. He is now facing criminal charges and a HUGE bill for doing this for 20 years!!

Same goes for satellite/cable piracy. It's great while it lasts but sooner or later...

KurtV

11-22-07, 08:18 AM

Interesting topic. Put me in the "won't be a snitch" camp. I wouldn't dream of stealing TV service or anything else myself. If a family member or friend was doing it I would try to dissuade them, but i don't want to be part of a society where everyone's informing on everyone else. They tried that in the Soviet bloc and it was a pretty unpleasant place to live (for that and many other reasons).

I find the slippery slope counter-argument unpersuasive. We make judgments every day as individuals and as a society about the relative wrongness of crimes; the different penalties for different crimes are evidence of that. I guess I draw the line at violent crimes and crimes that will likely cause harm to others (e.g. someone driving while intoxicated; I actually once reported someone who was smoking MJ while driving).

Ken S

11-22-07, 08:25 AM

It used to be that people were ashamed of stealing, fraud and other illegal acts...now they feel they can brag about them.

CJTE

11-22-07, 02:09 PM

This is totally false. It is an urban legend that never happened. Period.

I beg to differ, there are many testimonys of this happening, Call a CSR and ask to talk to a supervisor and ask them about an Hcard, or what happened on black sunday. Most of them were told this information in training.

Not true. Ever since subscribing with DirecTV in the 1990s, many of my receivers were never connected to phone lines for logistical reasons, and I never received such phone calls. DirecTV didn't go around calling their customers with such threats.
Yea, IDK about DirecTV calling people in regards to the phone line thing...

Another falsehood. In fact, DISH's cards to this day are still compromised (most versions of their ROM cards are). Their cards in the long run have been less secure than DirecTV's.

Yup, they also use Smart Cards versus SIM chips... The hardware is cheaper.

You really should stip spreading rumors around of this sort. First, they're many years old. Second, they're just not true.

Lord Vader

11-22-07, 09:02 PM

I beg to differ, there are many testimonys of this happening, Call a CSR and ask to talk to a supervisor and ask them about an Hcard, or what happened on black sunday. Most of them were told this information in training.

And you're going to believe everything alleged to have been said by a CSR? I am well aware of what an "H" card, "HU" card, and others were called. While I myself refused to ever get involved in something that could land me in court or worse, jail, I knew people who were heavily involved in stuff like that--idiots.

I can tell you that there never was this "Game Over" message sent to the cards and the screen. Black Sunday disabled numerous H cards on a Sunday in January, shortly before the Super Bowl. While this was at the time a major blow against pirates, they quickly found a way around that.

djwww98

11-22-07, 09:28 PM

Please, let's resist becoming a "snitch society." Let's just all mind our own business, as Stuart does.

Ya, that's working out really well for the folks in the ghettos.

djwww98

11-22-07, 09:30 PM

When their theft increases my prices, it's my business. Everyone that pays their bills legally is subsidizing the cost of those receivers.

+1

Stuart Sweet

11-22-07, 09:38 PM

Please, let's resist becoming a "snitch society." Let's just all mind our own business, as Stuart does.

You all are reading far more into my post than is there.

K4SMX

11-22-07, 09:47 PM

Ya, that's working out really well for the folks in the ghettos.
Read the previous posts, please, prior to posting. We're talking about non-violent misdemeanors, not felonies.

Here's the line from Al Pacino's Academy Award-winning performance as Slade in Scent of a Woman:

"You're building a rat ship here....a rat ship of snitches." He then proceeds to re-acquaint those assembled for the proceeding with the meaning of true leadership.

Anyone who thinks getting themselves involved in other peoples' pecadillos re: their cable or satellite bills should give this movie a viewing as well as question their own motives. I have two DirecTV accounts that are fully paid for, and I don't want to know or care what anyone else does. It's none of my business.

richiephx

11-22-07, 10:05 PM

I asked a question earlier and didn't get a response...I'll ask it again....I thought the new D* receivers talked to each other. Is that true or not? If so, would that inhibit account stacking?

K4SMX

11-22-07, 10:21 PM

I asked a question earlier and didn't get a response...I'll ask it again....I thought the new D* receivers talked to each other. Is that true or not? If so, would that inhibit account stacking?
No response? We can't have THAT! I'm not sure what you mean by "talked to each other." If they're not connected either by phone line or by network connection, they don't talk to anything.

gulfwarvet

11-22-07, 10:42 PM

We're talking about non-violent misdemeanors, not felonies.

so your saying since it's "non-violent misdemeanors", it's OK to do??

i really think that no matter how small the crime is. someone that has nothing to do with it, still pays in the long run. furthermore, no matter how small or how big the crime is, there will be always a victim. so if anyone that thinks this is OK to do, don't come back whining when the FCC hits them with very hefty fines for steeling satellite. also, besides the fine's, they could be facing jail time if they can't pay them.

looney2ns

11-22-07, 10:42 PM

Not true. Ever since subscribing with DirecTV in the 1990s, many of my receivers were never connected to phone lines for logistical reasons, and I never received such phone calls. DirecTV didn't go around calling their customers with such threats.

This definitely did happen, in this neck of the woods anyway.
I had a cat that liked wires, I received a call from Directv one day about my receiver not checking in for 30 days. Cat had chewed threw the telephone cord set.

Another time couple of years later, received a letter that one of my other receivers had not checked in. And if I didn't call within 10 days they would shut that reciever off. Come to find out the modem had died in that receiver. Yes, in the beginning, they did enforce the telephone line connection.

They are fools if they truely arn't any longer.

djwww98

11-22-07, 11:17 PM

Read the previous posts, please, prior to posting. We're talking about non-violent misdemeanors, not felonies.

Here's the line from Al Pacino's Academy Award-winning performance as Slade in Scent of a Woman:

"You're building a rat ship here....a rat ship of snitches." He then proceeds to re-acquaint those assembled for the proceeding with the meaning of true leadership.

Anyone who thinks getting themselves involved in other peoples' pecadillos re: their cable or satellite bills should give this movie a viewing as well as question their own motives. I have two DirecTV accounts that are fully paid for, and I don't want to know or care what anyone else does. It's none of my business.

Typical of the ACLU kool-aid drinkers...intelectualizing past the point of common sense.

carlsbad_bolt_fan

11-22-07, 11:56 PM

I take things to a more basic level:

If you want something, PAY FOR IT. Don't sponge of anyone, PAY FOR IT YOURSELF.

Would I snitch on someone? Well, I was in a similar situation. A family member bought a D* receiver/dish. It had a hacked card that allowed ALL CHANNELS to be received and they never paid a dime for service. Did I turn them in? Nope. Eventually, D* caught up to them and they suddenly weren't able to watch anything.

richiephx

11-23-07, 12:17 AM

No response? We can't have THAT! I'm not sure what you mean by "talked to each other." If they're not connected either by phone line or by network connection, they don't talk to anything.

I was under the impression that if one receiver was hooked up to a phone line that a second receiver not hooked to a phone line was able to communicate with the first receiver somehow so D* could verify that both receivers were in the same location. I thought this was the case with the newer E* receivers too. Am I misinformed?

K4SMX

11-23-07, 04:29 AM

I am not aware of any such functionality with DirecTV receivers.

K4SMX

11-23-07, 04:53 AM

so your saying since it's "non-violent misdemeanors", it's OK to do??.....
Of course not! Where did anyone here say that? We are discussing the OP, as to whether or not DirecTV's subscribers should or shouldn't report to them any other subscribers who are, shall we say, not in full compliance with their subscriber agreement. Obviously DirecTV really "does care." The question arose as to whether their subscribers should play police informant or whether DirecTV is able to take of this issue without the assistance of snitches and spies.
Typical of the ACLU kool-aid drinkers...intelectualizing past the point of common sense.
We don't condone personal attacks here. If you would like to comment thoughtfully on something said here, please feel free. BTW, I'm not a fan of that organization, being thoroughly versed in its history from its founding. And I wouldn't call this thread "intellectualizing." We are having a practical discussion on something people may or may not choose to deal with in their every day lives regarding their satellite TV service. It's kind of basic stuff, really. This has been rather revealing so far.

cweave02

11-23-07, 11:21 AM

I asked my intaller if the receiver had to be hooked up to a telephone line (if so, we would have to run one), and he said no, so mine is not hooked up to a landline.

gulfwarvet

11-23-07, 05:33 PM

We're talking about non-violent misdemeanors, not felonies.

Maybe i missed something but you stated this in your post. and i do know what is being discussed here about the OP. also i have seen a lot of bickering about who's a snitch, and wy would someone want to. so i was under the impression your not putting down people that will snitch? if i'm wrong about that, i apologize in advance.

Of course not! Where did anyone here say that? We are discussing the OP, as to whether or not DirecTV's subscribers should or shouldn't report to them any other subscribers who are, shall we say, not in full compliance with their subscriber agreement. Obviously DirecTV really "does care." The question arose as to whether their subscribers should play police informant or whether DirecTV is able to take of this issue without the assistance of snitches and spies.

ThomasM

11-23-07, 06:23 PM

I asked my intaller if the receiver had to be hooked up to a telephone line (if so, we would have to run one), and he said no, so mine is not hooked up to a landline.

Back before they figured out that ANYONE could watch and blocked it, channel 578 (PTNW-private network broadcast) showed all kinds of neat programs from the DirecTV engineering dept. designed to be shown to installers. One of the programs gave a lesson about the phone connection and it made a BIG DEAL about NOT doing an installation (even with just ONE receiver) without making sure the phone line connection was installed and the receiver passed the "phone line/modem" test. It even gave a lesson about selling the customer a "wireless" phone jack and installing it if there was no way to run a line to the receiver.

The program emphasized that this was so the sub could order PPV with the remote and get sports subs, but I knew what they really wanted it connected for.

K4SMX

11-23-07, 09:29 PM

Maybe i missed something but you stated this in your post. and i do know what is being discussed here about the OP. also i have seen a lot of bickering about who's a snitch, and wy would someone want to. so i was under the impression your not putting down people that will snitch? if i'm wrong about that, i apologize in advance.
If you snip parts of my posts which were originally replying to posters other than yourself, it makes it impossible to follow the original meaning.

I'm not "putting down" anyone. I don't really know how to make it any more clear: So again, I am simply suggesting that "snitching" on people who engage in petty thievery or any of a long list of other minor offenses is probably not something that's constructive in the long run as a general operating principle, once you really think about what the implications of living in a full-blown "snitch society" would be like.

We all know what they're doing is wrong. How we choose to deal with other people's faults says a lot about us, and I prefer that people live by good example and not get involved in policing the minor bad acts of others. In other words, in spite of every rationalization one can think of for not doing so, "mind your own business." We'll all be much happier in the long run, and bad actors eventually get tripped up. We don't need to help them along.

cweave02

11-24-07, 08:32 AM

The program emphasized that this was so the sub could order PPV with the remote and get sports subs, but I knew what they really wanted it connected for.

That is what he told me - and I said I did not intend to get PPV, so he said I did not need the phone connection.

Still waiting here in VA for the installer to come to my parents' house so my mother can watch basketball 24-7

jn185000

11-24-07, 11:16 AM

I would say they do, the day will come and very soon where ALL recievers will be tracked by a GPS as to where they are located. It is only a matter of time before this type of behavior is caught.

gulfwarvet

11-24-07, 06:06 PM

If you snip parts of my posts which were originally replying to posters other than yourself, it makes it impossible to follow the original meaning.

I'm not "putting down" anyone. I don't really know how to make it any more clear: So again, I am simply suggesting that "snitching" on people who engage in petty thievery or any of a long list of other minor offenses is probably not something that's constructive in the long run as a general operating principle, once you really think about what the implications of living in a full-blown "snitch society" would be like.

We all know what they're doing is wrong. How we choose to deal with other people's faults says a lot about us, and I prefer that people live by good example and not get involved in policing the minor bad acts of others. In other words, in spite of every rationalization one can think of for not doing so, "mind your own business." We'll all be much happier in the long run, and bad actors eventually get tripped up. We don't need to help them along.

i wasn't snipping as you might have thought, i was only questioning something you made a comment on. thats why there was several of these (???????) in my reply to your post. ;)

K4SMX

11-24-07, 08:51 PM

No worries, mate!

gulfwarvet

11-25-07, 12:06 AM

no worries hear...

Jeremy W

11-25-07, 06:32 AM

I can tell you that there never was this "Game Over" message sent to the cards and the screen.
The message never appeared on the screens, all the pirates saw on their TVs was a message saying "Insert Valid Access Card" and that was it. The "GAME OVER" message was actually just bits on the card that were changed by the ECM (Electronic Counter-Measure) that DirecTV sent down, and it is completely true. The only way to see it was to read the card with a computer.

I could probably write a book about hacking DirecTV in the old days, but this website doesn't like to even get close to hacking talk, so I'm not going to go any further.

Lord Vader

11-25-07, 09:01 AM

You're not the only one who can write a book. I've got a book series I can write. :p

I even know some people who got nailed or who were involved in the legal battles involving piracy.

Carl Spock

11-25-07, 09:59 AM

Could DirecTV's current lax attitude about policing their subscriber base be part of a sneaky marketing plan, especially during this time of explosive growth with all the new HD channels?

I'm thinking of a "first one's free" scenario. Back when cable Internet was brand new, it was a game to get pirated cable Internet in my town. Even the cable company's installers were hooking up free service. I know. I knew one installer well who hooked up most of my employees for free (I'm a risk avoidance kind of guy who paid for mine - yeah, I know, a pussy :D ). I was amazed that the cable company let all of this go on for 6-9 months. They had to know as they tracked how their bandwidth was being used. Then one day - poof! - the switch was flicked and all of those cable modems purchased at Best Buy were now dead. But by then my friends were all hooked. Each of them called up the cable company to subscribe for service. In hindsight, the cable company's seeming indifference turned out to be a great marketing scheme. Free cable Internet for a few months gave them a much larger subscriber base.

Could D* be planning the same thing? 50 active channels of HD would be a hell of a thing to give up. I'd see a lot of people bellying up to the bar if their receivers were shut off tomorrow.

wavemaster

11-25-07, 10:10 AM

Microsoft and Windows wouldn't have 1/4 the market share they have now if it were not for turning a blind eye to piracy for as long as they did.

10 years ago you could copy any OS, Office, and basically ANY of their business software. You couldn't copy a 30.00 game to save your life but thousand dollar server software could be ripped all day long.

Then along comes XP and Office 2000/03 with "activation" and all of a sudden you couldn't just copy/install rinse/repeat. They got literally 10's of millions of people using their software and now with activation they are getting them all on the dole.

It was brilliant marketing, and could not have happened by accident.

Jeremy W

11-25-07, 11:55 AM

I even know some people who got nailed or who were involved in the legal battles involving piracy.
I do too, seeing as I was one of them...

Luckily I was able to put a stop to it, thanks to a high up contact at GM. It was nice getting a phone call from a humbled DirecTV investigator informing me that all charges were being dropped. :lol:

Tom Robertson

11-25-07, 12:53 PM

To answer the original question, yes DIRECTV cares about the sharing of accounts and is working hard on technologies to prevent theft of service. If one reads the original SWM patents, one finds verbiage talking precisely about securing receivers to SWMs. (No, I don't think those features are enabled in the current SWM software.)

And there are other technologies that aren't as publicly confirmed but are meant to be very transparent to the customers, not as onerous as the phone line technology is today. We might see some of them; we definitely will see the effects over time. :)

Cheers,
Tom

Draconis

11-25-07, 02:47 PM

I firmly believe that doing the right thing is something you do when you first wake up in the morning, it’s not something you start doing when you get caught.

As for people getting their accounts turned off for having receivers in multiple locations? I know a few people that happened to.

People getting prosecuted for having a card reader? I’ve seen that too. In that case DIRECTV was right on the money. The jerk was selling satellite service and has his “customers” call him instead of DIRECTV if they had a problem with the service. He even tried to get me as a “customer”.

As for becoming a society of snitches. There is a very old quote that states, “Evil prospers when good people do nothing to stop it”. We seem to have become a society where nobody cares what other people are doing as long as it does not directly affect them. “Let the police catch them, it’s not my job.”

What people do not realize is that it does indirectly affect them, in a higher cost for programming among other things. Not to mention more restrictions that hurt the honest customers.

Nutshell, if I see someone breaking the law, I’m going to report them. You don’t like it, don’t break the law.

That’s my two bits on the matter. Apologies, this one hit a nerve.

What would be interesting is if DIRECTV released a system where you had one master HD DVR receiver that all 4 lines coming from the dish attached to. The master receiver then communicates to the other receivers via thinnet or RG45 cables and streams the content to those receivers on an as-needed basis. Sort of like a MFH3 system modified for home use. The other receivers would not have access cards and the master receiver would only provide content to receivers whose MAC address it recognized. Whole-home DVR functionality and no possibility of mirror fraud.

But that is just me speculating on a different type of distribution system.

Tibs

11-25-07, 03:52 PM

Serialize the LNBs, have them assign that to all new receivers. For the average joe, thats enough to stop it. Its not going to stop two neighbors from sharing one dish, but it would make it much harder for a majority of them.

cypher

11-25-07, 03:58 PM

Signal integrity has been secured since the introduction of the P4 card, and the P3 stream ended in April 2004 for DirecTV. There has been no breach since. The courts have since determined it is not illegal to posses a card reader/writer since these devices have legitimate uses. DirecTV has no proof that these devices were used for illegal purposes, the burden of proof is on DirecTV not the people they suspect may have used it to decrypt their signal to prove they actually used it for illicit purposes.

If DirecTV allows mobile reception to customers in RV's etc... it makes it difficult to argue that a paying customer from bringing the receiver from their regular home to their summer home temporarily. It would seem unreasonable for the same account to pay twice once for the regular home, and once for the summer home.

Now with the Internet connections and networking of the DirecTV equipment that can be, I'm sure DirecTV can tell if and where people are sharing equipment at different addresses, but do they want to enforce that? They can if they want to, once it starts to cut into profits. It appears that DirecTV is making more money every fiscal year, not less, so they are doing something right.

Now cable companies like Comcast disconnect at the pole, so when a customer discontinues service within 3 days it is disconnected. Now supervisors do routine audits to make sure the technician has in fact done what they were supposed to do by verifying they actually disconnected at the pole. If they didn't the supervisor will do it.

In a perfect world all people will obey the rules/contracts/laws etc. However we don't live in a perfect world, there will always be a few bad apples (not the majority) who will refuse to be conformists or obey the rules/contracts/laws etc.

Newer technologies will make theft much more difficult. DirecTV will not go after every customer unless they have deep pockets, because civilly they can go to court but they could lose even if they are in the right, if the thief gets a civil judgement, and cannot pay, then DirecTV is out all the lawyer fees they had to front and court costs. Poor people who have little money and cannot pay off a legal judgement don't have to. There is no debtor prison. Only criminal prison. Here is an analogy: OJ Simpson won his criminal case and was aquitted. However OJ lost his civil case and has not paid a penny to the families of the Goldman's & Brown's who brought the civil case because he (OJ) can't afford it. The courts have to factor in his costs to live, eat, and support his children, that comes before anything else in the eyes of the courts.

Is it wrong to get locals your not supposed to by not being completely honest on the physical address, the point being your still paying the same premium to DirecTV, but you are just getting the wrong locals. The same monetary monthly fee is going to DirecTV but it's just the wrong locals. Judge for yourself.

I don't condone or endorse theft, trickery or cheating of any kind.

Lord Vader

11-25-07, 04:43 PM

Signal integrity has been secured since the introduction of the P4 card, and the P3 stream ended in April 2004 for DirecTV.

FYI, the P3 stream didn't end because there never was such thing as a P3, P2, or any other type of "stream." The datastream is the same; it's the packets that are sent through the stream that are different. The P3 or HU card packets were no longer sent at that time, and the P4 packets remained the only ones capable of being written to the cards' EEPROM chips, thus decoding the signal.

KurtV

11-25-07, 05:01 PM

As for becoming a society of snitches. There is a very old quote that states, “Evil prospers when good people do nothing to stop it”. We seem to have become a society where nobody cares what other people are doing as long as it does not directly affect them. “Let the police catch them, it’s not my job.”
...
Nutshell, if I see someone breaking the law, I’m going to report them. You don’t like it, don’t break the law.

...

So do you call the police when you see someone speeding? Rolling through a 4-way stop? Without their seatbelt on? How about someone listening to an mp3 they ripped from someone else's CD?

How about unjust laws? Would you have reported a black man for drinking from the "whites only" fountain in the Jim crow era? Would you let the SS know that there were some Jews living next door who hadn't complied with the registration requirements?

What about consequences? Should you turn in a promising 18 year old high-school student for smoking weed on one occasion? What if he's poor but bright and hard-working and the blemish on his record will cost him a scholarship that will help lift him out of poverty?

What if you're mistaken about the facts and circumstances of the "offense"? Is the greater good served by you doing the "right thing" and having someone's privacy invaded, perhaps violently, by the police?

Would you express your disapproval of the behavior to the offending party and give them a chance to stop it? What if they didn't know what they were doing was wrong or illegal? Do people not deserve second chances sometimes?

Few things are as black and white as your post implies. I'm not saying there aren't circumstances when it's appropriate to report crimes, but there are few absolutes. Knowing what the right thing is, is not always as easy as you make it sound. Beyond all that, pervasive informing makes for an unpleasant society.