So, you want an alternative to Sky, you’ve been led to believe that using a foreign system is illegal and that we are just con men who want to sell you systems? Well I am going to prove to you that this is so far from the truth that it’s frightening and that BSKYB are hiding behind a truth that will cripple their commercial services department overnight.

NOTICE TO MPS (Media Protection Services) + BSKYB

I cordially invite you to challenge me on what I do and the accuracy of the information that I am providing in this statement for the publicans that you use your monopoly to manip every day.

First of all, we need to get things clear. Using a foreign satellite system is legal within certain boundaries and there are boundaries that you can step over which will make the use of one of foreign satellite illegal. What we provide is keeping you within those boundaries reasons of why I will elaborate as we go on.

A.) Contravening section 297 of the patents act which implies piracy and hacking of the signal.
B.) Card Sharing
C.) Using a residential Sky subscription for commercial purposes.
C.) Although not clear yet, but using a satellite provider that is based outside of the EU.

Basically what Sky and MPS do is take elements of what is illegal and twist it to suggest that what you are doing is then illegal. A clear understanding will help you realise what the situation is here.

If you think I am just some opinionated businessman that is trying to manipulate your opinion over that of the Multi Million Sky, then you are just as stupid as the elephant that walks around the circus with a hat on twirling in circles for the watching public.

So what is all the hot air about from Sky and what are they saying that you are doing or have done? Basically in every case that we have known Sky claim that a publican using a foreign satellite system to receive Premiere League matches is breaking the law by contravening the Patents Act 1988 section 297. What is this and where did it originate? Have a read of it>

Fraudulent reception of transmissions

Offence of fraudulently receiving programmes.
297.—(1) A person who dishonestly receives a programme included in a broadcasting or cable programme service provided from a place in the United Kingdom with intent to avoid payment of any charge applicable to the reception of the programme commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

(2) Where an offence under this section committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body, or a person purporting to act in any such capacity, he as well as the body corporate is guilty of the offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
In relation to a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members "director" means a member of the body corporate.

Section 297 of this act was introduced quite rightfully after people started selling specially modified D-Mac 2 cards. For those of you who don’t know what they are, you may however remember the old days when Sky was launched and you got an Astra receiver with just 16-32 channels? They used an analogue signal back then that was easily hacked, however as satellite was so new, some hackers exploited this situation by selling cards for around £50 that got you free sky for a year +. Obviously they were basically clones and cheating the broadcaster out of the rightful fee that they were due for the service. This is piracy and it still exists. You can still buy modules on most satellite sites very cheaply that will do this sort of thing; however this is very illegal and is of course contravening section 297.

Now, after all that, would you believe me if I told you that Sky + MPS claim that if you go and buy a subscription to a foreign broadcaster other that sky using a receiver that is legal and built in London that you are a hacker? Lol, well that is what is going on right now and they are walking all over publicans because they know that this is such a complex argument, that you will roll over and have your belly tickled.

Good news is it is coming to and end, have a read here, this is one of many cases up and down the country that are being ridiculed by magistrates, contrary to that ridiculous letter sent out by MPS a couple of months ago.
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=14476
One other thing, MPS put and ad in the Morning Advertiser claiming that they

To be honest the fashion in which this case has been won, I feel that the solicitor has just been pretty clever; however he hasn’t really used all his ammunition as he has not been engrossed in this saga long enough.

( I must stress that this next paragraph is based on commonly known information however I cannot prove that all of it is categorical fact)
Ask yourself a question, who are the biggest organisation that deal with electronic piracy in the Uk, a body of which are government owned? FACT – Federation against copyright theft. Why are they not dealing with this? Simple, they have turned their back on it because the Argument being used by MPS + BSKYB is fraudulent. Actually this is where MPS came from, Ray Hoskins the managing director of MPS worked for FACT and as this internal issue unfolded, he was offered a serious bumper package to come and work for SKY as if FACT turned their back publically it would be a catastrophe for them. Look for yourself; they were only formed 3 years ago when this really started becoming an issue.
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/4602aa6c1e4f715b84a2ca5a059141cb//compdetails

What else do they do apart from deal with Sky issues? Why no website and @AOL email address? Bit weak for company that protects “Media”. Why were they formed? It’s pretty obvious why, but they should have called themselves “Sky commercial services protection”.. lol

I’m sure your pretty board now with all this information on sky and what they are doing, blah, blah, blah. Maybe you are thinking, why should I believe this guy over what a multi million pound industry leader are forcing the courts to believe? Well, I can’t change that thought pattern, but what I can do is let you read something that will give you a better understanding of that character of this company.

Did you know that NDS who are the encryption end of BSkyB spent millions on piracy to try and cripple their biggest European competitor Canal Digital? Read this.
http://www.legal-rights.org/NDSLAWSUIT/canal+lawsuit.html

There is loads more info on this if you google it. http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=canal+nds&meta