Legal Drama involving Automation Direct and AVG Automation

Holy run-on sentence, Batman. I hope that guy isn't in the technical writing group at AVG.

Other than AVG thinking they got jammed, does anyone know the basis of the suit? It certainly didn't shine through the diatribe very clearly.

Keith
 
My limited understanding is that Automation Direct sold and brand labeled AVG products, and AVG didn't feel that they upheld the arrangement.

I do know that at the time I was a registered systems integrator for Automation Direct and AVG named my company in the suit and subpoened me, along with other firms listed on the Automation Direct site. I had to waste money on legal fees until a judge threw that part of the suit out. Needless to say this didn't make me favorably inclined to AVG!

I don't know the merits of the suit or the fairness of the judgement. I do know that Automation Direct has always treated me well, and AVG impressed me negatively.

I'll continue to support Automation Direct and their products.
 
I must be getting old... For all the words in that artical I did not really learn a darn thing about the suit or what AVG won.

I am curious though. I remeber when AD dropped EZ-touch and went with C-more. I liked the C-more better.

Now I have Red Lion G3's to play with so I dont really care about either of them...:ROFLMAO:
 
Ah yes, I remember when that happened (OLD THREAD). I didn't realize that were still battling it out. Automation Direct still sells the Optimate panels. Aren't they made by AVG?... :unsure:

No matter the outcome, I will continue to NOT not buy ANYTHING from EZAutomation.

🍻

-Eric

P.S. I have yet to come across an application where a PLC attached to the back of an HMI makes any sense... :rolleyes:
 
My memeory is fuzzy but I remember the AVG catalog that copied the look and feel of ADC and would confuse the heck out of most customers. Their whole "flavor" seems a bit distasteful and I wrote them off. Automation is a small world and trust is a huge part of selecting a vendor.

At the time I thought ADC would be hurt by not able (?) to offer the panel anymore, guess not.
 
Last edited:
The AVG write-up is, of course, a marketing view of the results of the trial from AVG's perspective. The people at ADC, understandably, have a different view. You can find a lot of the history of this online. The beginnings of the relationship seemed to be in a "buddy-buddy we'll both get rich" manner but with an incredibly ill thought out (it appears no lawyer's were involved) agreement which left a massive amount of room for misunderstandings. A judge tossed out several of the early motions from both sides because of the poorly constructed agreement. I would bet that none of the jurors on the panel were in technical fields or knew anything about modern technical development and 'reverse engineering'. We'll see what happens.
 
We'll see what happens.
Jury finds Automation Direct Guilty
On September 29th, 2010 AVG Automation finally got justice in its five year battle against Automationdirect.com, Inc.
(ADC). In 2005, AVG had sued ADC in Northern District of Illinois, for breach of contract for misappropriating AVG's
confidential intellectual property including engineering schematics, Bills of Materials, firmware and source code. AVG
further alleged that during its contract period with ADC from Sept 1999 to December 2004, ADC engaged in unethical
behavior behind AVG's back the magnitude of which came to light only after the courts forced ADC to reveal its secret
correspondence with its parent Koyo, that instead of fulfilling its obligations under the contract to make its best efforts
to secure a fair and increasing share of market for AVG products, it colluded with Koyo to do the opposite, that instead
of working to get 25% of Operator Interface market for AVG's products as called for as its Prime Directive, a term
inserted in 1999 in the contract by none other than Mr. Tim Hohmann himself, the Company Captain (President) of ADC,
it secretly undermined AVG's efforts to do so, and that starting in 2004, ADC made every attempt to wipe AVG's
Bettendorf plant off the map.
AVG at that point, instead of just caving in, fought back with the launch of its own direct marketing division;
EZAutomation and pursuing all legal remedies available to it.​
Automationdirect, instead of resolving its differences with AVG per the core values it espouses, instead of looking out
for the interests of customers and users of AVG panels , in the next five years mounted a furious attack on AVG by
trying to drown it out through an extremely aggressive legal fight.​
From 2005 onwards, it made every effort to keep
the dispute from going to a Jury, by mountains of legal maneuvers; over 200,000 pages of documents, hundreds and
hundreds of motions in the courts, two massive motions for summary judgment against AVG, and a trip to the court
house almost every week for three years to come with over 400 docket entries. For these next three years, Mr. Shalli
Kumar, President of AVG, was forced to practically live in the Federal Dirksen building, downtown Chicago. ADC even
dragged most of the automation control media in the fight by issuing subpoena and taking their depositions.
This all ended with a Jury trial starting September 27th under the direction of Judge Holderman, the chief Judge of the
Northern District of Illinois. The trial was conducted in a very efficient and high tech manner with great visuals for the
Jury and instant feedback to the lawyers and the Jury. The Jury consisted of eight citizens from all walks of life and as
Judge Holderman remarked throughout the trial, a very smart and diligent Jury.
In addition to Mr. Cary Fleischer of Chuhak and Tecson, Mr. Kumar had brought in one of the best, if not the best, trial
lawyer in the country by the name of Mr. Ken Suggs to represent AVG. In what could only be described as one of the
most emotional and persuasive closing statements delivered in the history of the US Civil Justice system, Mr. Suggs
pleaded with the Jury to do the right thing and give justice to Mr. Kumar, AVG and its employees. The Jury responded by
delivering a verdict on 42 claims at issue, in favor of AVG.
AVG considers it a great victory for the very hard working and extremely conscientious employees of its plants in
Bettendorf, Iowa and Carol Stream, Illinois. AVG considers it a great victory for its customers who otherwise could have
been without replacement touch panels for its special needs of Data Highway Plus, Modbus Plus and Profibus along with

2​
other unique features of EZTouch such as On-line programming. And last, but not the least, AVG considers it a great​
victory for US manufacturers and US jobs.
 
OK, so the jury reached a verdict. Then what happened? Was EZAutomation awarded compensation for damages? Was ADC ordered to cease production of C-More HMI panels?

My take on this whole thing is that it's a marketing campaign by EZAutomation putting themselves as David against Goliath, with Automation Direct assuming the role of Goliath.
 

Similar Topics

Hi everybody, I have DELTA PLC DVP-32ES and I have make a simple project in WPLSoft. using the input X0 to switch ON the output Y0 and using the...
Replies
0
Views
169
Hello, Within my company we have had a lot of discussion about the presence/ absence of a legal liability of people removing the signing safety...
Replies
2
Views
799
Just came across this: YouTube EDIT: I was over half way through it before I realized what today was :(
Replies
5
Views
1,786
I held a small class for a company giving PLC basics courses. Is it possible to put the name of the brand I taught them with on the certificate...
Replies
11
Views
2,213
Hi, I am having troubles importing a 500 internal database for tags on FTV ME i am getting invalid tag name Cause: Illegal character ('') at...
Replies
1
Views
1,130
Back
Top Bottom