1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Preloaded Skybox f5 legality?

Discussion in 'Satellite TV' started by feygan, May 21, 2013.

  1. feygan

    feygan Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hoping someone can offer some advice as i'm new to these devices. I have seen advertised on several classified sites along with ebay etc a "Loaded skybox f5 12 months" The listings all end up saying the same thing that:

    For 12 months I get all the listed channels unlocked and free to view beyond the initial payment.

    It doesn't take long to do some maths and realise this is far below what I would of paid if I had a monthly subscription to sky for these channels, hense alarm bells ring. I'm aware of other boxes such as sky italia and calco boxes where you are paying for a full 12 month subscription upfront, but clearly this is not the case here as sky never offer a "take this channel but not this one" deal from their packages.

    Can someone shed some light on the true legality of the preloaded skybox f5/f3 sales on both websites and classified adverts? Are they a genuine legal product or do they hail from the "this guy in the bar sold me this box" area?

    Thanks in advance for any help.
  2. kevkbuk

    kevkbuk Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,747
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +539
    Card sharing cannot be discussed here so google for more information. You are sharing a valid subscription card/s and the seller is (attempting) to make a profit from that. You'd be foolish to buy such a 'package', it may last 12 months or 12 minutes. There's nothing special about the Skybox it's just a cheap receiver that supports such things as many others do.
  3. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    45,575
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,418
    Welcome to AVF.
    The only way to access the satellite channels provided by SkyBSB is to take out a subscription to the company.
    They will provide a viewing card and a machine to use it in.
    Any other way cannot be discussed on this forum.
    Last edited: May 21, 2013
  4. feygan

    feygan Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    This was my understanding of the product but thanks for the clarification. Not meaning to try and debate sharing but am I right to believe then this is a totally illegal venture from the sellers standpoint and not simply a T&C breach?
  5. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    45,575
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,418
    If it involved use of a Sky subscription card then it would be a breach by the user of their T&C, and the law could come into it if SkyBSB chose to take civil action against the sellers.
  6. jim345

    jim345 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    550
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +77
    Not civil action - criminal. This pair were convicted for doing exactly the same thing, though community service and suspended sentences suggests the court didn't think "possessing an unauthorised decoder" was too serious an offence.
    Prosecuted for subscription re-sale
  7. davemurgatroyd2

    davemurgatroyd2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,111
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,091
    It is theft of pay TV and is a criminal offense - illegal cardsharing.
  8. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    45,575
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,418
    SkyBSB could also inititiate civil action - the two are not mutually exclusive.
    The report specifies that the charge was "possessing an unauthorised decoder" which seems unlikely, and also refers to a "satellite balanced on his garden shed" which is nonsense.
  9. kevkbuk

    kevkbuk Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,747
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +539
    "beamed channels such as Sky Sports and Sky Movies across the UK using a trampoline-sized dish in his garden"

    :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
  10. Delvey

    Delvey Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    5,630
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +788
    It's the daily mail what do you expect.
    Be warned if you have a large dish, you could be beaming sky to other people
  11. StaticMan

    StaticMan Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Messages:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6
    Another typical Daily Fail story:rolleyes:
  12. 1080 jawbreaker

    1080 jawbreaker Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,540
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings:
    +166
    :lmao

    theres a point, its ok to errect a 20ft trampoline in your back garden but not a 20 dish.

    SKY are currently hardware pairing the subs to recievers, this will put an end to those fly by nite 12 month subs for peanuts
    Last edited: May 21, 2013
  13. Chris Muriel

    Chris Muriel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2002
    Messages:
    6,823
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +699
    So a "trampoline dish" is a new device for bouncing satellite signals into other folks' homes :D
  14. jim345

    jim345 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    550
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +77
    The details would have come from an agency. They can be found on other media sites, even the mention of the big dish, but at least one site had the sense to remove the bit about its use. Whatever the actual charge was, the court decided the activity was illegal, though a minor offence, and the same could be said for their customers, even if prosecution is unlikely.

    If you're planning a clandestine operation, of any type, it's not very smart to have something that size that will attract attention. Members should bear that in mind before their next upgrade. :nono:
  15. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    45,575
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,418
    and it would be interesting to know!
    I doubt very much that there's a specific statute against "possessing an unauthorised decoder" - who'd do the authorising?
  16. kevkbuk

    kevkbuk Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,747
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +539
    Rubbish, these guys are easy to find, providers need not drive around looking for big dishes...
  17. davemurgatroyd2

    davemurgatroyd2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,111
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,091
    Is it not obvious - receivers are authorised by the service provider in the Ts & Cs in the contract for their services. I forget the actual wording but "unauthorised decoder" is part of the charge that has been on the statute books since the early days of hacked cable boxes and satellite receivers (some 15 years or more) and I believe as well as "non approved" receivers also covers illegally modified/chipped ones.
    Last edited: May 21, 2013
  18. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    45,575
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,418
    No, it's not obvious at all, as service providers are hardly arms of the law, but that's not to say that you're wrong.
    If ""unauthorised decoder" is part of the charge that has been on the statute books" it would be interesting to know which statute that comes under.
  19. jim345

    jim345 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    550
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +77
  20. davemurgatroyd2

    davemurgatroyd2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,111
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,091
    Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 section 297A was the first appearance - 25 years ago
    Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
    Last edited: May 21, 2013
  21. pedro2000uk

    pedro2000uk Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,729
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +598
    Oh yeah that old thing, another of Thatcher's backhander favours to Murdock before she got kicked out,

    [​IMG]
    As anyone with any sense knows what it was... another real fraud committed at No. 10 ...

    & does anyone know how many times that's actually been enacted?

    [I own copyrights & I've had them seriously breeched, even in the last 24 months, I just didn't have someone in the UK government I could exchange favours for that could change a civil case into criminal- just for me .. silly me, I should have had a media empire).
    Last edited: May 22, 2013
  22. davemurgatroyd2

    davemurgatroyd2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,111
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,091
    Really your anti-Sky bias and paranoia is showing again. It is rather unbelievable when a vast majority of the cases in the 80's and 90's were in reference to theft of cable TV and chipped cable boxes. This was brought in at the same time as similar legislation was being made in the US where theft of cable TV was rife at the time.
  23. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    45,575
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,418
    Thanks for the relevations of those details.

    Once again Mr Bumble is proved correct - the law is an ass.
  24. pedro2000uk

    pedro2000uk Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,729
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +598
    psst.. & that wasn't quite the wording in 1988 - those are amendments, why do you think chipped cable boxes carried on being sold openly at fairs etc.. but no one would go near sly.

Share This Page