Re: The latest Brinkle in Jim's life.

["Roland Moore" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

You seem like you are a principled man trying to play by the rules as you
understand them to be in your jurisdiction. I think many entities such as
Brinks get used to getting their own way by threat of intimidation. Their
number one weapon is the legal system fueled by their number two weapon,
enough money to fuel it to the desired end. I think any lawyer Brinks hires
will be more than happy to go after you next. You are still bogged down in
the particulars of right and wrong, as well as the technical merits of the
issues presented. To a Brinks lawyer it is just another way to get paid. It
is what they do. Remember fairness, justice, reason, singularly or in any
combination, never come out of any court of law, save by pure accident.
There is simply no way any feeling person can go into any courtroom in the
country and not be alternately bored to tears and moved to tears seeing what
happens there. The excuses made by attorneys and judges to soothe their
consciences are beyond ridiculous. Most rely on their limited role and feign
disinterest or surprise at the outcome. This is made easier because many
have found a home for big egos, a place where they get paid to argue, and
then gamble with a client's money and interests in hopes that they'll never
lose. Many attorneys and judges once contaminated by all this move on to
become the political lawmakers, perfectly jaded to further destroy the
system.
The legal system in the beginning was designed to resolve matters between
two honest men. In Jim's dispute with Brinks one is missing. It is easy to
understand Jim's feelings about the legal system since this is his first
real brush with it seems. However once disabused by the notion that there is
any justice to be had in court, I am sure he will see more wisdom in
defending himself in a more vigorous and convention manner. Jim doesn't have
the money to face down Brinks. Or should I say Jim has shown a reluctance to
pony up the cash necessary to square off with Brinks. Now he must engage the
resources he has. Brinks has achieved a pyrrhic victory here and Jim can
exploit it. There are folks that love Brinks and those that hate Brinks. I
don't think Brinks can do much in the various alarm associations to help
their case. That is where Jim should begin to find the people, cash and
resources to shame Brinks back into line. If he stay holed up in Tampa it
won't be long before Brinks carpet bombs him into dust.


"Frank Olson" <use_the_email_links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:AzcWi.165767$1y4.139303@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Apparently the Texas court has seen fit to hold Jim formally in
> contempt.  The severe repercussions they mentioned in the Order to
> Appear have no doubt been set into motion.  Jim will be "forced" to make
> an appearance (probably sooner than later).  I find it interesting that
> one paragraph in the Order granting the Motion for Contempt states:
>
> "Evidence submitted by Brink?s shows by clear and convincing evidence that
> methods of resetting and circumventing lockout codes on Brink?s control
> panels
> have been disseminated through Defendant?s website. Additionally,
> content from
> Brink?s installation manuals has been disseminated through Defendant?s
> website.
> The same information has also been disseminated through a third party?s
> website
> with Defendant?s encouragement. All of these disseminations clearly
violate
> the Preliminary Injunction."
>
> I'm not sure what "clear and convincing evidence" they speak of.
> Brink's control panels are only slightly different from the ones I have
> used (in fact they're made by the same companies) and for someone to
> post the installation manuals is really no threat to me.  I can
> demonstrate just as clearly that Brinks panels are nothing more than
> rebadged (and dumbed down) GE and Honeywell units.  Even the "so called"
> Brinks installation manuals clearly show the copyright (and "Brinks"
> isn't mentioned).
>
> Jim, FWIW, I feel for ya bud.  I'm only "one" of what could become many
> "third party" sites that have decided to distribute "Tech Help!".  I'm
> not doing it for money or for "glory".  I'm doing it because I believe
> the program is a useful tool for *any* technician to be able to have at
> his disposal.  I'm also not doing this because Jim is "encouraging" me
> to do so.
>
> Once again, I'm publicly requesting anyone at "Brinks" or a member of
> their legal team to contact me and provide me with the location of any
> Brinks intellectual property within the Tech Help! software.  I know you
> are monitoring this Newsgroup.  My email is feolson at
> yoursecuritysource dot com.  For your information, I derive zero income
> from http://www.yoursecuritysource.com (it simply isn't set up to "sell"
> anything, nor was it intended to do so), so further emails to my hosting
> provider requesting this is a useless pursuit.  Until you can clearly
> show me where "Tech Help!" violates Brinks Copyright, or illegally
> disseminates their "Intellectual Property", I will continue to host it.
>
> If anyone else wishes to share their thoughts, please do.  If you
> prefer, you can email me privately at the above address or send Jim a
> note at jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> My thoughts and prayers are with Jim and his family.  Good luck, Bro!!