DISH Network L.L.C. et al v. Guy Falk, No. 2:2014cv04300 - Document 18 (C.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION by Judge Margaret M. Morrow, Related to: Joint REQUEST to Reopen Case and Enter Agreed Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction 17 , PERMANENT INJUNCTION filed by Judge Margaret M. Morrow. (ah)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
DISH Network L.L.C. et al v. Guy Falk Doc. 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION 9 10 11 12 13 14 Case No. 2:14-cv-04300-MMM-JEM DISH NETWORK L.L.C., ECHOSTAR TECHNOLOGIES L.L.C., and NAGRASTAR LLC, [PROPOSED] AGREED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION Plaintiffs, v. 15 GUY FALK, 16 Defendant. 17 18 Having considered the Stipulation to Reopen Case and Enter Agreed Final 19 Judgment and Permanent Injunction that was filed by the parties, the court file in 20 this matter, and the applicable law, the Court approves the stipulation and ORDERS 21 as follows: 22 23 24 (1) Defendant Guy Falk, and any other person acting in active concert or participation with Defendant, is hereby permanently enjoined from: A. circumventing or assisting others in circumventing DISH 25 Network’s security system, or otherwise intercepting or assisting others in 26 intercepting DISH Network’s satellite signal; 27 28 B. testing, analyzing, reverse engineering, manipulating, or otherwise extracting codes, data, or information from DISH Network’s satellite 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 receivers, smart cards, satellite data stream, or any other part or component of the 2 DISH Network security system. 3 (2) This permanent injunction takes effect immediately. 4 (3) Judgment is entered for DISH Network on Count I of the complaint 5 alleging violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1), 6 Count II alleging violations of the Federal Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 605(a), 7 and Count III alleging violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 8 U.S.C. §§ 2511(1)(a) and 2520. The Court is informed that the parties have agreed 9 to a confidential settlement sum, and therefore there are no damages awarded in this 10 judgment. 11 (4) Each party is to bear its own attorney’s fees and costs. 12 (5) The Court retains jurisdiction over this action for a period of two years 13 for the purpose of enforcing this final judgment and permanent injunction. 14 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: September 17, 2014 17 18 Hon. Margaret M. Morrow United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
