*********************
COMMENT:  RMR IS RMR IS RMR  FROM MAY 26, 2015 ARTICLE
**********************
Ken
    A little trivia to string the Newsletter discussions about alternate sources of Recurring Revenue.
One of my mentors is Stewart Resnick.…. Founder of API/American Protection Industries, Los Angeles 1970’s-80,s … lots of M&A consolidation to quickly  become California largest private security firm.  Sold to Automated Security Holdings out of Great Britain. Still focused on Recurring Revenue, Stewart went from the  alarm business to the RMR Agra business with lots of trees and vines for lots of fruits, nuts, grapes.  Now rather than install alarm systems and generate Recurring Revenue with minimal ongoing maintenance and service… he planted and bought trees and vines that required minimal maintenance and service that generated long term Recurring Revenue… same thing.  Stewart is now the nations largest producer and processor of citrus, nuts and grapes.  He is still in the RMR business, now on the Forbs list as one of the richest Americans at $4B.  Are you just in the alarm business or in a creative RMR business? 
Lee Jones
Support Services Group
***************************
QUESTION:  CAMERAS IN APARTMENT BUILDING
***************************
Ken
    If the security cameras is facing an apartment unit instead of the stairs. Is that legal ? 
Jesus Sanabria
*************************
RESPONSE
*************************
    The landlord can install cameras in common areas that view public places, and there would be no restriction on viewing hallway doors.  The camera cannot view into an apartment however, and installing a camera that does will most likely lead to an invasion of privacy lawsuit against the landlord.
*************************
COMMENT ON USE OF VIDEO FROM MAY 23, 2015 ARTICLE
**************************
Ken
    Your message on video content, and being unable to use it without blocking the identity of a perp seems to contradict almost every reason many customers have a camera system installed.  It certainly restricts the cameras advantage to the community and society in general.
    If one cannot post, distribute, and otherwise view without restriction, a scene in which a crime is permitted (without blocking the individuals) what good is the system?!   It’s like telling the old west law officer you can make a ‘WANTED’ poster but you have to block out details of the face.
    There may be some ‘in between’ scenarios.  For example, there is a very useful website that combines YouTube and Google Maps.  It allows you to sign up and, if there is a criminal act recorded on someone’s camera system, and they post it, you are notified.   It allows the community to combine their security cameras effectiveness. 
    Basically, one is posting a movie (of the best shot) to YouTube for the community to be aware as well as participate in identification.  Since law enforcement is treating home burglary as if it were a transaction between you and your insurance company, giving them the video accomplishes way less than we in the industry wish to think.  It is one of the few ways the neighborhood can be proactive. 
    I cannot be sure by your descriptions where exactly this would fall.  Law enforcement may be given a copy, but it is posted nonetheless.  Sometimes the video may show a great shot of a person committing the crime, other times it is a vehicle driving away with a trailer.  The criminal often lives or works in the area.
Zeke Lay
Comtec
Oklahoma
**************************
RESPONSE
**************************
    You should not use the image or name of another person without their consent for your own commercial purposes, unless you are in law enforcement or the person is now newsworthy and you are in the news business.  
    So what do I mean by that?  You have video images of someone breaking into a house or video stream of someone setting a fire or placing graffiti on a building wall.  If you received the data and stored it you can release it to the subscriber and law enforcement.  What I think you can't do is put the person's face and image on your web site to show how video surveillance works.  You can't take an ad out or create a new logo with the person's face on your logo or in the ad.  It would be improper use of another's image.  Some people lose their right to the image, such as public figures, but even then you can't use it for your commercial purposes.  For example, and I am really just giving this off the top of my head, I can't take the image of a celebrity and put his or her face on my web site, without a name, with a great endorsement of my services, and neither can you.  Today's news publicized that some noted gangster's assets were being distributed to his victims; Whitey Bugler.  You can't use his picture on your web site; not without him having a right to sue you for violating his civil rights and maybe surveillance statutes in your state.  But the news can display his name and picture all they want because the purpose is to disseminate news rather than use the image for private commercial gain.  
    Also keep in mind that you need to be careful with data showing illegal activity, even after arrest.  Until there is a conviction the person is presumed innocent and may very well end up not being convicted.  Your dissemination of information that this person was involved in criminal activity would end up not being true, subjecting you to a potential defamation suit.
****************************