they would try to find "loopholes" in the rule about withdrawing from cases over on Slashdot. Alas, I was coerrct.Doubtless, theyll say that this is a "different" action, because theyre seeking the "real" infringer this time... or something like that. And I cant wait for them to spin you pointing out their representations as "proof" or an "admission" that the people you represent are the actual infringers.But Im somehow surprised they didnt wait for the first judge to rule. Ordinarily, theyd want that judge to be out of the picture, so Im guessing theres some legal reason behind that which you might want to ponder.I just cant see why they wouldnt wait until theyd fully escaped from the old court before bringing this anew; it doesnt make sense unless they derive some crazy advantage from it, like the ability to raise new issues in the first case? No, I cant see a judge allowing that, but something bugs me.They may be sloppy at times, but they love underhanded tricks. Be careful, Im sure theyre up to something novel.Id read the FRCP really carefully while imagining all the ways they might argue for more bites at the apple. Somehow, I just dont think this is the only dirty trick they intend to employ.- IDBIIP

well fuck upc its there own problem that there eprnyction system is not full proof and the swicth to nagra 3 is not going to make any differance as far as i know there has been reports that it has been hack and alot of sites say its has been done what they should do is get another company to make a whole brand new eprnyction system for them as that crap nagravision but hey its there own fault that there system get hacked to be honest for the money they are asking for they deserve whats coming