For several years, satellite TV provider DirecTV has been suing people who use illicit decoders to steal its signals and get free service. The problem is that DirecTV has been treating anyone who buys a smart card writer as a potential TV thief.
Individuals who can afford lawyers to fight back have gotten DirecTV to drop their individual suits, but for many innocent consumers, settling was cheaper than proving their innocense. Making matters worse, DirecTV's demand letters were frequently misleading, intimidating many people who weren't aware of their (quite substantial) legal rights. The result: sending out unfounded demand letters was a major profit center for DirecTV.
The EFF and Stanford's Cyberlaw Clinic, recognizing extortion when they saw it, established DirecTV Defense to fight back, helping consumers threatened by DirecTV band together and providing information on defenses and counterclaims.
Today, DirecTV agreed to send more informative and balanced letters, to drop unfounded cases more quickly, and to set a higher threshold of proof before siccing the lawyers on individual consumers. These practices should go a substantial way towards curbing the abuses that have characterized DirecTV's anti-piracy campaign.
Let's hear it for the EFF and the Stanford Cyberlaw Clinic, for DirecTV, and for negotiated solutions.