OnSSI Sues Milestone

Author: 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.

*** ****** ******* ***** *** ********* ** *** ***** ** court.

** ****,***** ******** ********* ***** **** ****,***** ********** **************** ******* *** ********. *******, ***** *** ********* ** ********* caught ** *******.

** **** ****, ** ******* *** ***** ** ***** ********* and **** *********'* ******** **, ******** ** ****.

[***************]

Contention *****

*** **** ***** ******** ** ******* ******** / ****** ***** systems ***** ********* *** **** ****** ** ********* ******** ********. OnSSI **** ********* ** ******** ***** ******, **** ****** **** have **** *** **.

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

************, ***** **** **** **** ******* **** ********* $*+ ******* for ******* ********** ******* ******* ****:

***** ****, ***** *** ********* ********* **** **** ********** *** over **** ******* ** * ***** **** ** ****** ** $13,000,000. ** ** *** ****** ** **** *********, ***** ******** at ***** **** ******* ***** ********* **** ** ****** ********* Care **** ******** ********* *** ******* ***** ******* ****, *** which ***** *** **** ********* ** ****** ** $*,***,***.

OnSSI ******

***** **** ***** ******** *** * ******** **** ** *** agreement:

***** ****, ******** ********* ******** ******** ** *** ******** ********, OnSSI ********* **** ********* **** **** ********** ***** **** ******** with **** ****** ******** ** *** ****** ******* ** ******* Xprotect

***, ***** ******* **** ********* *** ******* ********* ***** ********:

*** ******* ******* ** ********* ******** ** ******* **** **.*, which ********* ******** ** ** ***** ******** ****. **** ***** inquired ** ********* **** ** ***** ******* *** *******, ********* responded **** ** ***** *** **** ******* ******** ******* **.* available *** ******** ** *****’* ********* ******* *** ***** ********* Care **** ********** ***** ** ******. **** *********** *** ******, Milestone **** **** ********** ****** ** *********** *** *****’* *********** for *********** ** ** ***** ******* *, ****, ** * separate *** ********* ********* **** * ***** *****.

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

*******, ** * ********* ** ****, ********* ********:

***** ******* *, ****, *********’* *********** ** ******* ******** ** OnSSI **** ******, ********* *********** ************ ** *** ****** **** Milestone, ** * ****** ******, ***** ***** ****** *** ******* or *** ******** ********* ***** *** ********* ********, *** *** were ******** ** *** *********** ** *** *** ***********.

********* ** ********* ** ***** ********* ******* ******** ***** ********* to ****** ** ********* ** * ********** *** **** (********* '****' ******** ** ***** ********).

*********

***** ***** ** ** ***** ** ***** **, ****, ** the ***** **** ** **** ********. ** ****** ******* ** or **** **** **** ******, *** ** **** ***** ****** to ******** **** ***** ** ** *** * **** ** more. **** *****, ** ******* **** ***** ****** ** ********* to ***** **** *** ** **** ** ******** ***** ** open ***** **** ** * **** *** ***********.

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

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

*******, ***** *********** *** ********* ****** *** ******* **** ***** as **** ** ********, ** **** **** *** ******* ***** what ***** ******* *** *** ********* / *********.

****** ****, ** ** **** *** ** ** *****. ** some *****, *** ****** ********* *** **** ** ***, *** worst * *********** ** **** ***** ** *** ********, ** not ****** ****** ** ***** ******** **** ***** ** * competitive ************. **********, ** ***** **** ***** ***** ******* **** settling ** ***** ****** ********* *** *** ***** ** *** 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.

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Most Recent Industry Reports

Testing Bandwidth vs. Frame Rate on Jan 23, 2019
Selecting frame rate has a major impact on surveillance bandwidth and storage consumption. But with smart codecs now common and cameras more...
Camera Course January 2019 on Jan 23, 2019
This is the only independent surveillance camera course, based on in-depth product and technology testing. Lots of manufacturer training exists...
Bosch Favorability Results 2019 on Jan 23, 2019
Bosch's favorability moderately strengthed, in new IPVM integrator statistics over their results from 2017, with 2019 results showing strong net...
Intersec 2019 Show Report on Jan 23, 2019
The 2019 Intersec show, held annually in Dubai, is now complete. IPVM attended for 3 days, interviewing numerous Chinese and Western video...
2019 Camera Book Released on Jan 22, 2019
This is the best, most comprehensive security camera training in the world, based on our unprecedented testing. Now, all IPVM PRO Members can get...
Milesight Company Profile on Jan 22, 2019
Milesight Technology, a Chinese company building an International branded business, says they are slowly building their presence through a series...
Cable Trenching for Surveillance on Jan 21, 2019
Trenching cable for surveillance is surprisingly complex. While using shovels, picks, and hoes is not advanced technology, the proper planning,...
Milestone Favorability Results 2019 on Jan 21, 2019
Milestone's favorability moderately strengthed, in new IPVM integrator statistics over their results from 2016. While the industry has been...
The IP Camera Lock-In Trend: Meraki and Verkada on Jan 18, 2019
Open systems and interoperability have become core features of video surveillance systems, as virtually all professional IP cameras integrate with...
NYPD Refutes False SCMP Hikvision Story on Jan 18, 2019
The NYPD has refuted the SCMP Hikvision story, the Voice of America has reported. On January 11, 2018, the SCMP alleged that the NYPD was using...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact