OnSSI Sues Milestone

By: John Honovich, Published on Apr 13, 2016

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.

*** ****** ******* ***** and ********* ** *** going ** *****.

** ****,***** ******** ********* ***** **** ****,***** ********** **************** ******* *** ********. However, ***** *** ********* of ********* ****** ** between.

** **** ****, ** examine *** ***** ** suing ********* *** **** Milestone's ******** **, ******** to ****.


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.”

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?

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.

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

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?

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,367 reports, 855 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

Related Reports

Milestone Has Problems on Oct 01, 2019
Milestone has problems. While the company previously excelled in the shift to IP cameras, as IP has matured and competitive differentiation has...
Nortek and SDS Fight Over Failed Settlement on Jun 05, 2019
Distributor SDS said they reached a deal with Nortek but Nortek says no settlement was reached and the suit is still on. In this post, based on...
Axis Wins, Avigilon Tripwire Patent Annulled on Feb 06, 2019
For approaching a decade, the fundamental Object Video tripwire patent has been at the core of an industry debate over patenting and video...
Credit Card Alternative Divvy [DO NOT RECOMMEND] on Nov 13, 2018
UPDATE 2020: We dropped Divvy after numerous problems and poor support, explained and updated within. Most security integrators are small...
Nortek Sues SDS, Battle Over Unpaid Bill and Cancelled Lines on Aug 13, 2018
Nortek and SDS legal battle continues. As IPVM reported, SDS sued Nortek alleging bribery and antitrust violation. However, Wave fired back at SDS,...
Axis / Avigilon Legal Battle Rises on Aug 09, 2018
In what is shaping up to be high-powered, will-not-back-down battle, Axis and Avigilon are squaring off in multiple legal contests. In 2017, IPVM...
Axis Wins, Arecont Cancels Multi-Imager Patent on Feb 26, 2018
16 months after Arecont publicly threatened Axis [link no longer available] and 7 months after Axis took Arecont to patent 'court', Axis has won,...
Axis Granted Review of Arecont Multi-Imager: 'More Likely Than Not' 'Unpatentable' on Jan 09, 2018
In 2016, Arecont publicly threatened Axis [link no longer available] with infringing on their multi-imager patent. In 2017, Axis responded by...
Avigilon / Canon New Lawsuits, No Settlement on Oct 11, 2017
In July, Canon sued Avigilon, a notably rare move amongst major players in the industry, including Canon's subsidiaries Axis and Milestone. At...
Milestone Beats OnSSI In Court on Jul 17, 2017
The litigation between former partners Milestone and OnSSI has finished, confirmed by both parties. In April 2016, OnSSI sued Milestone and in...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Verkada: "IPVM Should Never Be Your Source of News" on Jul 02, 2020
Verkada was unhappy with IPVM's recent coverage declaring that reading IPVM is 'not a good look' and that 'IPVM should never be your source of...
Vintra Presents FulcrumAI Face Recognition on Jul 02, 2020
Vintra presented its FulcrumAI face recognition and mask detection offering at the May 2020 IPVM Startups show. Inside this report: A...
Uniview Wrist Temperature Reader Tested on Jul 02, 2020
Uniview is promoting measuring wrist temperatures whereas most others are just offering forehead or inner canthus measurements. But how well does...
Dahua USA Admits Thermal Solutions "Qualify As Medical Devices" on Jul 02, 2020
Dahua USA has issued a press release admitting a controversial point in the industry but an obvious one to the US FDA, that the thermal temperature...
Access Control Online Show - July 2020 - With 40+ Manufacturers - Register Now on Jul 01, 2020
IPVM is excited to announce our July 2020 Access Control Show. With 40+ companies presenting across 4 days, this is a unique opportunity to hear...
Hanwha Face Mask Detection Tested on Jul 01, 2020
Face mask detection or, more specifically lack-of-face-mask detection, is an expanding offering in the midst of coronavirus. Hanwha in partnership...
UK Government Says Fever Cameras "Unsuitable" on Jul 01, 2020
The UK government's medical device regulator, MHRA, told IPVM that fever-seeking thermal cameras are "unsuitable for this purpose" and recommends...
Camera Course Summer 2020 on Jun 30, 2020
This is the only independent surveillance camera course, based on in-depth product and technology testing. Lots of manufacturer training...
Worst Over But Integrators Still Dealing With Coronavirus Problems (June Statistics) on Jun 30, 2020
While numbers of integrators very impacted by Coronavirus continue to drop, most are still moderately dealing with the pandemic's problems, June...