Unmasking IPVM

Jan 6, 2022
1
3
Hong Kong
I have removed this post. The user refers to a website that looks like it was created specifically to promulgate this story. As much as I disagree with John this is not the place for it and the post is highly suspect. Note that John did not contact me about this, I am doing this on my own.
Fenderman
 

Attachments

  • 1641529058834.png
    1641529058834.png
    2.7 MB · Views: 99
Last edited by a moderator:
Just for fun, lets look into one of the arguments here where they claim ipvm was "bullying" a camera company.

One American company had enough. In a cease and desist letter sent to IPVM, one security equipment maker said, “Your campaign to intentionally defame Arecont includes recent postings by you entitled ‘Lying at Arecont Vision’ and ‘Liars at Arecont Vision’. In these postings, in which you say you are relying on the findings of an alleged security blogger, you accuse my client of lying in its advertising, specifically with respect to a MegaDome® print advertisement. You also make an off-handed remark alluding to what you characterize as Arecont’s ‘fallacious megapixel math.’ I will give you the benefit of the doubt - this one time – that, perhaps, you honestly believed at the time that what you posted was true and that the image in the circle marked ‘actual image’ was not an actual image from Arecont’s camera. Be advised, however, that the image in the circle labeled ‘actual image’ in Arecont’s print advertisement is, in fact, an actual, true image from an Arecont camera. Rather than falsely conclude that the image was simply too good to be true and, therefore, that it must be false advertising, you should have investigated the quality of Arecont’s products more thoroughly. Then, perhaps, you would not find yourself in the situation you are now in. Dissemination of false, defamatory information is actionable in a court of law.”

Here's the "Lying at Arecont Vision / Liars at Arecont Vision" report referenced above. Archive.org has a copy of this article from 2016 just to demonstrate that this article was not changed recently to favor ipvm.

Be your own judge. Who was in the wrong here?

I realize not everyone has a keen eye for detail, but it couldn't be more obvious to me that the Arecont marketing was indeed making false claims, and if anyone was being bullied, it was ipvm when Arecont sent a lawyer after them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200 and TVille
I have removed the original post. The user refers to a website that looks like it was created specifically to promulgate this story. As much as I disagree with John this is not the place for it and the post is highly suspect. Note that John did not contact me about this, I am doing this on my own.
 
I got to read it before it was removed. While I do not know anything about IPVM other than their camera calculator, when someone states that someone else should be cancelled, I am very much against it. I hate the cancel culture present day has fallen into.