1. Home
  2. CCTV, Alarms and other Physical Security
  3. The Brinks PSA
  4. Page 2

The Brinks PSA

The only principle of concern among this crowd is one that draws interest I'm afraid.

"tourman" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com... On Oct 11, 5:49 pm, "Robert L Bass" wrote:

RHC: No matter one way or the other. I would learn to crack it and then toss it anyway, since it is unusable equipment for any real purpose. This stupid legal action has really gone too far. I have to wonder what they hope to gain in the industry from this kind of approach other than a black eye. Someone within Brinks with some marketing vision had better get their act together before their lawyers cause the company harm with this one track legal action. This sort of thing should put all legitimate alarm companies on notice that these low end, money grubbing type companies can eventually cause us all a lot of grief. I scratch my head and I still cannot come up with a real reason for Brinks to be doing this (other than on principle, since he won't knuckle under). Their equipment is proprietary, so useless to anyone except their station other than the odd person who might want to use it in local mode. User manuals on Jim's site would only assist Brinks end user customers who might otherwise have to bug Brinks for another copy of their manuals. And anything that Jim might have put up on his site regarding programming their panels (even inadvertantly) would be useless to anyone who didn't have the proper programmers anyway (since it appears they are not keypad programmable). So what the hell kind of information could he have ever had on his site that could have possibly caused a threat to anything Brinks is doing in their business. It beats the hell out of me !!!!!!!!

Reply to
Just Looking
Loading thread data ...

I can answer that. Brinks isn't concerned with Jim Rojas at all. They see him as an irritant, not a threat. The problem for them is that other, much larger players may do the same thing. If they don't preserve their IP rights future litigants may claim that they have abandoned those rights. It's easier for them to beat up on Rojas than a large, national firm that can afford (and has enough sense to employ) lawyers.

Sadly, although he could probably have won the case if he had done things right, Jim is about to be crushed by Brinks. All this nonsense in the newsgroup serves only to provide more ammunition for Brinks' lawyers to use against Jim. Another gentleman wondered how Brinks would respond if they realized how much bad publicity the case is giving them here. I can answer that, too. They don't give a rat's olson what you, I or any other alarm industry person thinks. They already know they sell garbage and they know that we know it. They count on making the sale before the consumer has an opportunity to hear a better offer from a real alarm company. It's the same as Sonitrash. They don't care what the competition thinks either.

While we're at it, neither do I. Do you? :^)

What harm? A bunch of small-potato alarm salesman in an obscure newsgroup won't respect them any more? We never did before anyway and it didn't hurt them.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

I think your assessment of Brinks' plans and motives are accurate for the most part. However Brinks', like everyone and everything, can suffer. There may not be much to come out of here that is negative enough to impact them, that's certain, but it may generate a considerable amount in some other places. I have always been told "never make enemies for free". Seems like that is good advice for all, including Brinks. Even better that they won't consider anything at all could ever come from such a rag tag, constantly bickering, obscure group as this. Too bad they had to pick on one of the nicest guys here. If they went after you, or a couple of others posting here (including me) on the other hand, well, never mind. I don't want to do their thinking for them.

Reply to
Roland Moore

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.