THE LEGAL CORNER
THE NEW “STATE OF ART” FOR SECURITY ALARM PANELS
By Michael J. Revness, Esquire on June 28, 2017
Manufacturers of security alarm panels, distributors and dealers all BEWARE; the INTERCEPTOR™ appears to be the new “state of art” — ignore it at your own peril.
WHAT IS THE INTERCEPTOR™?
The INTERCEPTOR™ is a first of its kind microprocessor based patent pending technology that is designed to protect the critically vulnerable data-bus and auxiliary power output wiring which is installed throughout a protected premises.
Without the INTERCEPTOR™, an accidental fire shorting out any of the systems data-bus wiring or the systems auxiliary power output wiring for any of the loop powered devices such as audio or motion detectors or an intentional act by an intruder on the data-bus wiring itself, through any of the system keypads, will render the alarm system nonfunctional under most circumstances and the central monitoring station will not be notified.
Once the INTERCEPTOR™ detects an accidental short on the data-bus wiring or on the auxiliary power output wiring of the system or from an intentional attack on the data-bus wiring, it instantly isolates and protects all mission critical devices from the control panels remote data-bus wiring, auxiliary power output wiring, and all interconnected equipment that is connected to the data-bus and/or the auxiliary power output of the control panel set.
WHY THE INTERCEPTOR™ REQUIRES YOUR ATTENTION
Manufacturers of security alarm panels, distributors and dealers are all at risk for lawsuits based on strict product liability, negligence and breach of implied warranties if a product placed into the stream of commerce and sold to a customer is dangerous or defective and causes or contributes to personal injury or property damage. These lawsuits cost manufacturers, distributors, dealers and their insurers millions upon millions of dollars in losses each and every year.
Manufacturers often defend these lawsuits based on a defense known as the “state of the art defense.” This “state of the art defense” applies when a defendant manufacturer could not have known about a particular danger or hazard in a product by using the scientific or technical knowledge available at the time the product was made. A “state of the art” product is one that conformed to all required and reasonably available safety standards based on the science, knowledge and technology existing at the time it was made.
The reasoning behind the “state of the art defense” is that, because the manufacturer could not have known about and/or designed out the defect or danger even by using the best scientific and technical knowledge available at the time, it is not fair for our laws to hold the manufacturer liable.
The “state of the art defense’ often arises when a plaintiff is injured from a defective or dangerous product and files a lawsuit to recover money. In these cases, a defendant manufacturer who knew or could have figured out a safer design for the product based on exiting science and technology, but failed to do so, may be liable if the plaintiff is injured by the actual defective design of the product, and likely would not have been injured if the product was manufactured according to the alternative, safer “state of the art” design. On the other hand, if the product conformed to the “state of the art” such that no safer design was available at the time it was manufactured and placed into the stream of commerce, the “state of the art defense” may save a manufacturer from the potential for crippling liability to the injured plaintiff.
THE INTERCEPTOR™ — as the above product description demonstrates, the INTERCEPTOR™ appears to have both identified a dangerous design defect in existing security alarm panels, and fixed it with a safer design which the courts may very well now recognize as the new “state of art” in security alarm panels. With the INTERCEPTOR™ now available in the marketplace, a manufacturer of a security alarm panel without the INTERCEPTOR™ may very well be challenged to defend itself from a lawsuit filed by an injured plaintiff when a security alarm panel fails due to the data-bus wiring being shorted out by fire or by the security alarm panel failing due to an intentional attack on the data-bus by an intruder. By way of example, an intruder could simply attack any of the system keypads by shorting out its wiring or introducing high-voltage onto the data-bus through the wiring that connects to any of the system keypads. If it can be shown that an accidental shorting or intentional attack on the systems data-bus wiring caused or contributed to the injuryor property loss, one would expect the injured or damaged plaintiff to argue in such a lawsuit that had the manufacturer incorporated the “state of the art” INTERCEPTOR™ into the design of the control panel, injury and/or damages would have either been avoided or minimized.
Manufacturers are not the only ones possibly at peril for ignoring this new “state of art”, but distributors and dealers are as well. Under strict product liability laws, distributors and dealers are often equally liable with a manufacturer for dangerous and defective products. Also, dealers may be at risk for negligence lawsuits for selecting, selling and installing security alarm panels to customers which does not include the “state of art” INTERCEPTOR™.
So BEWARE; the INTERCEPTOR™ appears to have both disrupted the “state of the art”, and created new “state of art” for all security alarm panels; ignore it at your own peril.
To learn more about the Interceptor™ visit www.interceptorprotected.com
THIS ARTICLE IS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Michael J. Revness, Esquire is a nationally recognized attorney and thought leader in the security alarm industry. Mr. Revness is a founder of the law firm of
Kurtz & Revness, P.C. (www.kandrlaw.com), and the founder of www.AlarmLegal.com and www.SecurityAlarmBroker.com.