OnSSI Sues Milestone

By John Honovich, Published Apr 13, 2016, 09:34am EDT

The battle between OnSSI and Milestone is now going to court.

In 2015, OnSSI acquired Seetec and later that year, OnSSI terminated selling Milestone powered VMS licenses. However, there are thousands of customers caught in between.

In this note, we examine why OnSSI is suing Milestone and what Milestone's response is, provided to IPVM.

Contention *****

*** **** ***** ******** is ******* ******** / legacy ***** ******* ***** Milestone *** **** ****** to ********* ******** ********. OnSSI **** ********* ** blocking ***** ******, **** though **** **** **** for **.

$5 ******* *****

************, ***** **** **** have ******* **** ********* $5+ ******* *** ******* agreements ******* ******* ****:

***** ****, ***** *** purchased ********* **** **** protection *** **** **** systems ** * ***** cost ** ****** ** $13,000,000. ** ** *** filing ** **** *********, OnSSI ******** ** ***** 2000 ******* ***** ********* have ** ****** ********* Care **** ******** ********* for ******* ***** ******* 2020, *** ***** ***** has **** ********* ** excess ** $*,***,***.

OnSSI ******

***** **** ***** ******** are * ******** **** of *** *********:

***** ****, ******** ********* released ******** ** *** XProtect ********, ***** ********* with ********* **** **** protection ***** **** ******** with **** ****** ******** to *** ****** ******* of ******* ********

***, ***** ******* **** Milestone *** ******* ********* those ********:

*** ******* ******* ** Milestone ******** ** ******* 2016 **.*, ***** ********* released ** ** ***** December ****. **** ***** inquired ** ********* **** it ***** ******* *** upgrade, ********* ********* **** it ***** *** **** Branded ******** ******* **.* available *** ******** ** OnSSI’s ********* ******* *** valid ********* **** **** protection ***** ** ******. Upon *********** *** ******, Milestone **** **** ********** action ** *********** *** OnSSI’s *********** *** *********** on ** ***** ******* 1, ****, ** * separate *** ********* ********* with * ***** *****.

*********'********

*******, ** * ********* to ****, ********* ********:

***** ******* *, ****, Milestone’s *********** ** ******* software ** ***** **** ceased, ********* *********** ************ to *** ****** **** Milestone, ** * ****** leader, ***** ***** ****** any ******* ** *** customer ********* ***** *** Milestone ********, *** *** were ******** ** *** termination ** *** *** partnership.

********* ** ********* ** their ********* ******* ******** OnSSI ********* ** ****** to ********* ** * relatively *** **** (********* '****' ******** ** OnSSI ********).

*********

***** ***** ** ** court (*** *********)** ***** **, ****, so *** ***** **** is **** ********. ** cannot ******* ** ** when **** **** ******, but ** **** ***** choose ** ******** **** could ** ** *** a **** ** ****. That *****, ** ******* both ***** ****** ** motivated ** ***** **** out ** **** ** possible ***** ** **** court **** ** * risk *** ***********.

Vote / *** ********?

Outlook *** ***** *********

*******, ***** *********** *** customers ****** *** ******* from ***** ** **** as ********, ** **** have *** ******* ***** what ***** ******* *** for ********* / *********.

****** ****, ** ** hard *** ** ** guess. ** **** *****, the ****** ********* *** drag ** ***, *** worst * *********** ** puts ***** ** *** meantime, ** *** ****** access ** ***** ******** puts ***** ** * competitive ************. **********, ** think **** ***** ***** benefit **** ******** ** their ****** ********* *** not ***** ** *** crossfire.

Comments (21)

Here is the 17 page OnSSI court filing.

Here is Milestone's complete response to IPVM:

“Given Milestone’s surviving obligations of confidentiality surrounding the terms and conditions of Milestone’s OEM partnership agreement with OnSSI, which terminated on October 1, 2015, Milestone will not comment on any present litigation involving the parties, to include OnSSI’s recently filed complaint against Milestone.

What Milestone may communicate with regards to the termination of the OEM partnership is that it is evident, through OnSSI’s own marketing activities and from publically available sources, that OnSSI’s future product strategy will be based on the Seetec Video Management Software platform.

With this in mind and with the fact that since October 1, 2015, Milestone’s obligations to deliver software to OnSSI have ceased, Milestone proactively communicated to the market that Milestone, as a market leader, would stand behind any partner or end customer presently using the Milestone software, and who were affected by the termination of the OEM partnership.”

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 3
Unhelpful
Funny

Everyone knew that the heart of ONSSI's VMS was Milestone, their relationship was always tenuous. I don't feel for anyone that continued to represent ONSSI's VMS, at all. I also have no love for their management/leadership and their sales tactics, one lie after another. I also don't feel for anyone that fell for their sales pitch related to the concept that the recording engine was not important, that it was all about the client/UI. If you couldn't see through the BS then I am not sorry. Regarding commenting on the lawsuit, I can't because we don't know the legal relationship between Milestone and ONSSI related specifically to ongoing support, this is the heart of the issue. Nobody can force Milestone to support what they provided to ONSSI if it wasn't part of their agreement, can they?

Agree: 2
Disagree: 4
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Doesn't matter if Milestone or OnSSI is right from a strategic standpoint, which benefits Milestone. Milestone has deep pockets now (Canon). The cost of litigation will probably be more of a blow to OnSSI than Milestone. Their goal may be to push them out of the North Am market and seek refuge more in the Euro market, where Seetec is from.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Totally agree. Milestone now has the legal backing of a $35B company. Good luck, OnSSI.

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Their goal may be to push them out of the North Am market and seek refuge more in the Euro market, where Seetec is from.

Fwiw, Milestone was actually acquired by Canon Europe, so maybe a false refuge?

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

True. Push them to Europe, then pressure them in Europe. I think ultimately they want to make a finish of them and takeover all OnSSI customers selling on "..... You've already been using us for years! (And just didn't know it)." Pure speculation on my part- just a theory.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Famous last words

The scenario that you are describing is a completely unrealistic scenario. I won’t get into Milestone’s contractual obligations, but I can and will reiterate to you that newly supported devices *will* continue to be made available for OnSSI customers who are using legacy recorder versions....

Official Response Requested From ONSSI Concerning Legacy Driver Packs...

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 1

Genetec also expressed interest in takeovers of ONSSI systems - between Milestone and Genetec and other a few others circling over head, its like buzzards flying over a bleeding yet still breathing corpse.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

How much truth is there to all I've heard with regard to the instability of the SeeTech engine? Has anyone had success with it? Problems? Seems like this would be a non-issue if it worked well.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Using version 5.1 it and it works. The main problems is the lack of support for popular cameras and the very cryptic and bizarre Recording on Motion Detection drt-up. On the Milestone engine it was fluid: You would check boxes and be done .. With the Seetec/OnSSI engine it is an unnecessary complicated and, so far, IME unreliable process. The Server Side motion detection does use a lot of resources in our case. Same settings on the Milestone engine did not faze a dual processor 16-core server with 60 cameras. On this one 30 cameras and the server starts reacting slowly. They need to address it. Else the OnSSI GUI and feel is preserved and it is very stable... Not a crash, nothing.. Simply works.

On that I am not sure what OnSSI will gain on fighting with Milestone. They should rather concentrate on getting traction on the Market and addressing the fact that VMS licenses costing more than good performance cameras these days is a proposal-buster. They could make a serious run with their simple cost structure, their very attractive GUI and their stable performance. Very strong .. We had problems with the Milestone engine that disappeared once we switched to the Seetec Engine. The darn thing is stable and solid.

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 2
Unhelpful
Funny
We've been with OnSSI since the NetDVMS days. This new forced upgrade has caused us to lose thousands of dollars in technician hours and extreme loss of goodwill with our OnSSI customers. Of the 5 sites we have either upgraded or installed new with the 5.1 product all have had major issues. Also it's more resource intensive than the old one.
Agree
Disagree
Informative: 4
Unhelpful
Funny

The Seetec Cayuga 7 engine and program run well. Their single program configures and allows live viewing, LPR, and configuration very easily.

The Ocularis front-end has issues. Customers are complaining of compressed video, poor PTZ control, and randomized commands being sent to cameras. Ocularis's use of 3 different programs to configure and sync servers is very frustrating.

The sad news is that SeeTec Cayuga is not available in the USA. So if a customer wanted to purchase and use SeeTec they are out of luck.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

The sad news is that SeeTec Cayuga is not available in the USA. So if a customer wanted to purchase and use SeeTec they are out of luck.

I'm not sure ONSSI wants to encourage a "double conversion", from ONSSI/Milestone to SeeTec/SeeTec.

On the other hand, it might be technically easier than a O/M conversion, since the front and back end were made for each other.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

In response for the "double conversion" you are correct. However, the SeeTec software works better then the modified ONSSI front end, and because of that the configuration and live viewing is different. IMO they should have simply rebranded the graphics on the Cayuga front-end while testing and working with integrators/beta-testers to meet or exceed the performance of the SeeTec version. As a result, customers who are at 5.1 are very frustrated with the fore-mentioned problems that have not been resolved.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

IMO they should have simply rebranded the graphics on the Cayuga front-end while testing and working with integrators/beta-testers to meet or exceed the performance of the SeeTec version.

Yet, surely Ocularis has some features that Cayuga doesn't, or at least works differently than Cayuga; changing to Cayuga front-end would upset those used to Ocularis, no?

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

After comparing apples to apples, SeeTec meets or exceeds the features of the modified Ocularis front-end. I agree that it would upset those using and are familiar with the Ocularis Client. However, the amount of frustration and issues that were not corrected has forced them away from 5.x. They are moving to Milestone just to restore the features and ease of management that they once had back in 4.x

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 1
Unhelpful
Funny

It'l be a cold day in hell before ONSSI yanks Ocularis.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Since I'm using Ocularis Version 5.1 i can see the improvements and the stability, very simple to configure.

now its by far better then the milestone engine.

for the motion detection- when you adjusting the server based motion detection and follow the instructions you don't miss any movements like occurs in version 4.

the option to use any kind of hard drive without the needs to use separate disks for live and archive very important.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

We have experienced sluggish performance when performing Server-side motion detection with 30 cameras. Same server with Milestone engine with motion detection didn;t break a sweat with 60 cameras...

OnSSI recorder could be seen as an improvement aside from the birhting problems :) . It is better than given credit for, I must say.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

We just got the PO to switch over our last ONSSI customer to another platform. Worked out as a blessing for us because we no longer have to support as many VMS's. One less monkey in the process.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

You are not alone. Another 2 major customers were able to migrate off of 5.1 as well. When they finished installing their new software, a burden of relief was felt and they are back to a good place now.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny
Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,961 reports, 927 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports