17 Charged With Hacking Into Satellite TV; violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act...

Associated Press ^

[RCW2001]

LOS ANGELES Feb. 12 —

A federal grand jury has indicted 17 people who authorities say hacked into satellite television transmissions, causing millions of dollars in losses to DirecTV and Dish Network, the U.S. Attorney's office said.

Six of the defendants were charged with violating the anti-encryption provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The other charges involved conspiracy or manufacturing a device for the purpose of stealing satellite signals. All three counts carry a maximum prison sentence of five years.

The indictments were returned last month and unsealed Tuesday.

Ten defendants already have agreed to plead guilty, authorities said, including a 43-year-old West Los Angeles man who has acknowledged causing $14.8 million in losses to satellite TV companies.

The investigation was aimed at people who develop software and hardware devices that crack the scrambled signals designed to limit satellite TV services to paying customers. DirecTV, for instances, uses "smart cards" as part of their set-top boxes that descramble satellite signals.

The defendants named Tuesday are charged with thwarting that security, often meeting in secret online chat rooms to exchange data and techniques and using such nicknames as "FreeTV," authorities said.

The defendants range in age from 19 to 52. Most live in California, although some are from Kentucky, North Carolina, Texas, Indiana, Florida and Ohio.

"This case demonstrates our commitment to identifying and prosecuting sophisticated computer hackers who steal the intellectual property of others for their own economic benefit," U.S. Attorney Debra Yang said.

[RoughDobermann]

Not only is it on my property, it is passing through my body as I type this message.

Unless you're sitting outside typing, no it is not. DBS signals won't even pass through glass.

[KansasConservative1]

I think it is safe to assume that they were not just "grabbing" the signals that were on their property. With the damage estimate, it appears that they were creating and distributing decoders. This is like modifying the odometer (legal) and then selling the car to someone. (not legal).

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

DirecTV programming content (i.e., the signal) is private property

DirecTV does not own the space time continuum. The signal that is imposed upon it, once broadcast, is public property, no matter which way you look at it. By the logic you are using, I could play a CD on my front porch and charge anybody who walks by and hears it, then have them thrown in jail if they refuse to pay.

[KansasConservative1]

I guess this means all digitized music on the "public" internet is fine as well????? anyone...

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

Unless you're sitting outside typing, no it is not. DBS signals won't even pass through glass.

If that's so, it doesn't matter. DirecTV does not own the fabric of space. If they broadcast a signal, it is public property. Period.

[KansasConservative1]

All you signal belong to us

[KansasConservative1]

Really what I meant to say was...


All your signal are belong to us

[KansasConservative1]

Really what I meant to say was...


All your signal are belong to us

[KansasConservative1]

Really what I meant to say was...


All your signal are belong to us

[Chemist_Geek]

Are you asserting that you have an absolute right to listen to your neighbor's encrypted wireless phone because you can detect the signal on your property?

Until recently, that was the case. It used the be the law of the land that the airwaves were the common property of all, and anything anyone emitted over it was fair game for listening. One wasn't permitted to repeat that to others or use it, but one could observe one's property, the airwaves.

Breaking encription is a separate issue, and one which, IMHO, is morally wrong.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

I guess this means all digitized music on the "public" internet is fine as well????? anyone...

Yep. If the person who owns the copyright posts the music there its. Anyway, you're comparing apples and oranges. The only analogy that works is comparing what DirecTV is doing to someone talking or playing music on a street corner. If you broadcast the signal out into space, it is gone, baby. It is public property, no if's, and's, or but's.

[Hodar]

I think it is safe to assume that they were not just "grabbing" the signals ...

Absolutely. Some people offer 'services' that are illegal (and very profitable).

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

I guess this means all digitized music on the "public" internet is fine as well????? anyone...

Yep. If the person who owns the copyright posts the music there its. Anyway, you're comparing apples and oranges. The only analogy that works is comparing what DirecTV is doing to someone talking or playing music on a street corner. If you broadcast the signal out into space, it is gone, baby. It is public property, no if's, and's, or but's.

[Arthalion]

Now, you're arguing two different things:

then you're saying that you have a legal right to decrypt the stuff
Yes you do. If a radio signal passes through your property and strikes your receiver, then there is no reason why you can't record it. Once a signal recorded on YOUR property, intercepted with YOUR antenna, and stored on YOUR storage medium is secured, you have every legal right to look at it and try and figure out what's in it.

and sell the access to the Chinese
Nope, you don't have the right to sell or even GIVE it to anybody. While you have the right to listen to military signals on your property, the fact still exists that the data you're reading is classified and potentially a matter of national security. By distributing that information, you'll be breaking a whole host of laws that have nothing to do with the legal concepts of "radios" and "encryption", and everything to do with concepts like "treason" and "espionage".

[glennaro]

You make excellent points. Yet, stealing the signal just because it's easy to steal is still theft. Agreed?

[glennaro]

C'mon now. Your analogy doesn't work because your basis is wrong: Just because a signal is broadcast on the space-time continuum (I like that phrase!) doesn't mean it's public property. By that logic, if you borrow a book from a library you could scan it into your computer and publish it as your own work. After all, it's in the public domain -- on your property as well.

[cinFLA]

Remind me not to leave my wallet in the car next time I come to your house....you want it, you should be able to steal it. Right? It's on your property. Right?

Apples and oranges.

[RoughDobermann]

If they broadcast a signal, it is public property. Period.

Okay, fine. The signal may be public property but the data within it is not. Collect it and analyze it all you want, but the only way to access it legally (i.e., use it to watch/hear video/audio) is to set up an account and activate a smart card.

[glennaro]

C'mon now. Your analogy doesn't work because your basis is wrong: Just because a signal is broadcast on the space-time continuum (I like that phrase!) doesn't mean it's public property. By that logic, if you borrow a book from a library you could scan it into your computer and publish it as your own work. After all, it's in the public domain -- on your property as well.

[cinFLA]

Remind me not to leave my wallet in the car next time I come to your house....you want it, you should be able to steal it. Right? It's on your property. Right?

Apples and oranges.