SPIDER By BrandSafway. In Wire Rope and Other Suspension Means and Materials, Tools & Equipment, Maintenance, Installation, etc., Safety Tools, Devices,.
This article needs additional citations for. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.Find sources: – ( July 2009) A false alarm, also called a nuisance alarm, is the deceptive or erroneous report of an emergency, causing unnecessary panic and/or bringing resources (such as emergency services) to a place where they are not needed. False may occur with residential burglary alarms, industrial alarms, and in signal detection theory.
False alarms have the potential to divert emergency responders away from legitimate emergencies, which could ultimately lead to loss of life. In some cases, repeated false alarms in a certain area may cause occupants to develop and to start ignoring most alarms, knowing that each time it will probably be false. Contents.Overview The term “false alarm” refers to alarm systems in many different applications being triggered by something other than the expected trigger-event.
Examples of this those applications include residential burglar alarms, smoke detectors, industrial alarms, and signal detection theory. The term “false alarm” may actually be semantically incorrect in some uses. For example, a residential burglar alarm could easily be triggered by the residents of a home accidentally. The alarm is not necessarily false – it was triggered by the expected event – but it is “false” in the sense that the police should not be alerted.
Due to this problem, false alarms can also be referred to as “nuisance alarms.”Sociologist explains that there are many negative effects of false alarms, such as 'fear, havoc, disruptions to emergency services, and wasted resources.' Health and safety can also be effected, as they can cause anxiety and encourage people to race toward an alarm or away from it, which can result in accidents in the panic. One more problem is the ', which can cause people to ignore legitimate alarms; 'in the event of a real attack, subsequent warnings may be taken lightly or ignored altogether.' This section contains. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to train.
Please help either by rewriting the how-to content or by it to,. ( March 2016)Residential burglar alarms In the United States, between 94% and 98% of all burglar alarm activations are falsely triggered. Causes and prevention Residential burglar alarms can be caused by improper arming and disarming of the system, power outages and weak batteries, wandering pets, and unsecured doors and windows. False alarms cost police agencies up 6.5 million personnel hours, according to the International Association of Chiefs of Police.
A 2002 study by the U.S. Justice Department estimated the cost of false alarms to be as high as $1.5 billion.
Due to this cost, many cities now require permits for burglar alarms, have enacted verified response protocols, or have introduced fines for excessive false alarms.Improper arming and disarming of the system This is typically caused by simple mistakes like entering the wrong passcode or letting too much time pass before entering the code. These types of false alarms can be prevented by taking more time to disarm systems, and entering a home with at least one hand free to properly disarm one's system. Untrained users Untrained users can be anyone who may need to temporarily access one's home but is unfamiliar with one's system.
![What Is False Car What Is False Car](http://www.fupa.com.tr/mp-include/uploads/2015/03/falsecar-3_wa410.jpg)
Common untrained users include cleaning crews, repairmen, dog walkers, or babysitters. Better educating temporary users about a particular system can prevent them from accidentally triggering it. Power problems. This section may be too technical for most readers to understand.
Please to, without removing the technical details. ( September 2018) If a power outage occurs on system with a weak backup battery it can cause the alarm to trigger.
Preventing this type of false alarm requires alarm owner to periodically replace the backup battery.Most people should have surge suppression on the AC power as well as the RJ31X area. If properly installed, the surges should bypass the system. So to help prevent a feedback loop up case ground, never install the RJ31X surge suppression inside the burglar alarm panel, and only ground it to the ground lug of the AC surge suppression. To even reduce more false alarms, tie three to four knots in the phone line between the RJ31X Surge suppression and the panel as well as three to four knots in the low voltage AC power source feeding the panel after the AC surge suppression.A voltage drop, current rise is another issue caused by power induced by HVAC systems and other heavy loads. AC surge suppression will not stop this problem so a power monitoring device will work.
Example, in a nursing home a fire alarm system keeps having problems with their power supply and at times deprogramming the panel every time the backup generator came on. In facilities like these, they are required to test generators every month. When the power goes out, that is one thing, but when the power comes on all the HVAC systems are on the same time delay and when they come on, the heavy load is what causes the voltage drop and current rise and the system will go into false alarm. There is technology like the 120HWCP20CBPLC that will monitor the power and when the voltage drops, the unit shuts off the power. The batteries inside the fire alarm will sustain the system until the power is back to normal.Close proximity strikes by lightning will always set off the ground fault circuit and at times blow the system out if the system did not follow NEC code Art. 250.94 which illustrates how to get rid of grounding differentials. A good ground filter/notch filter will prevent a feedback loop up case ground which causes false alarms.
Also surge suppression improperly installed inside a fire alarm panel will also cause a feedback loop up case ground and cause false alarms. So the surge suppression must be outside the box, in a plastic box and not grounded directly to the fire panel, rather the grounded to the ground side/line side of the in-line series three stage two tank circuit designed AC surge suppression. Parallel will not protect a fire alarm panel nor prevent false alarms. In series surge suppression will at least help one control where the surges are coming from and the ground filter will also help.
Tie three to four knots in the low voltage wire between the low voltage surge suppress and the fire alarm panel, and tie at least one knot in the phase/neutral/and ground wire attached to the power supply. This will help mitigate false alarms, as well as help one's surge suppression do a better job. Pets Some motion sensors will be triggered by pets moving around a home. This problem can be fixed by finding motion detectors that are not sensitive to infrared signatures belonging to anything less than eighty pounds, or by restricting the access of pets to rooms with motion detectors. Unsecured windows and doors Windows and doors that are not fully closed can cause the alarm contacts to be misaligned which can result in a false alarm. In addition, if a door or window is left slightly ajar, wind may be able to blow them open which will also cause a false alarm.
To prevent this from happening, door and windows should always be shut securely and locked. Smoke detectors False alarms are also common with smoke detectors and building fire alarm systems. They occur when smoke detectors are triggered by smoke that is not a result of a dangerous fire. Cigarettes, cooking at high temperatures, burning baked goods, blowing out large numbers of birthday candles, fireplaces and woodburners when used around a smoke detector can all be causes of these false alarms.
Additionally, steam can trigger an ionisation smoke detector that is too sensitive, another potential cause of false alarms.Industrial alarms In, a false alarm (nuisance alarm) could refer either to an alarm with little content that can usually safely be eliminated, or one that could be valid but is triggered by a faulty instrument. Both types are problematic because of the 'cry wolf' effect described above.Signal detection theory In (signal), a false alarm occurs where a non-target event exceeds the detection criterion and is identified as a target (see ).Examples Soviet Lieutenant Colonel correctly assessed the, thus averting a nuclear war.One tragic example of the consequences of continued false alarms was the on January 19, 2000. Because of false fire alarms many students started ignoring the fire alarms. However, when an actual fire broke out, three students who ignored the fire alarms died and many others suffered injuries.Likewise, after too many audible car alarms are found false, most people no longer pay attention to see whether someone is stealing a vehicle, so even certain experienced thieves may confess that these alarms would not deter them from stealing vehicles.Another notable false alarm was the on January 13, 2018, in which an emergency message was sent incorrectly warning people in of an incoming. Semantics The term 'false alarm' is actually a misnomer, and is regularly replaced by the term 'nuisance alarm'.
When a sensor operates, it is hardly false , and it is usually a true indication of the present state of the sensor. A more appropriate term is nuisance, indicating that the alarm activation is inconvenient, annoying, or vexatious. A prime example of this difference is being set off by spiders.
(A spider crawling on a web in front of the motion detector appears very large to the motion detector.)False alarms could also refer to situations where one becomes startled about something that is later determined to be untrue.See also.References. ' 'Ballistic Missile Threat Inbound. This is Not a Drill': The Formidable Threat of False Alarms'.
Skeptical Inquirer. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. 42 (3): 5. Sampson, Rana; United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (2007).
False Burglar Alarms (Technical report). Cite web requires website=. Cite web requires website=.
(PDF). Cite web requires website=. Nec Code Book Art. 250.94. (PDF). Archived from (PDF) on 2017-04-06. Cite uses deprecated parameter deadurl= ; Cite web requires website=.
(PDF). Archived from (PDF) on 2012-12-07. Cite uses deprecated parameter deadurl= ; Cite web requires website=. Wang, Amy (January 13, 2018). The Washington Post.
Retrieved January 13, 2018. March 13, 2007, at theExternal links.
False Advertising'Any advertising or promotion that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities or geographic origin of goods, services or commercial activities' (, 15 U.S.C.A. Proof RequirementTo establish that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer.
The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false. Development of RegulationsOne early attempt to create advertising industry standards was made in 1911 when the trade journal Printer's Ink proposed that false advertising be classified as a crime. As a result, false advertising became a misdemeanor in 44 states.
Statutes were based on the model statute suggested by Printer's Ink. These statutes are still in effect; however, they are rarely used because it requires proving that the false advertising exists, a difficult standard to meet.In place of the Printer's Ink statute, states adopted the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act of 1964 (revised 1966), which lists a dozen different items that are prohibited in the advertising trade. The only remedy available under this act is injunctive relief—a court order that admonishes the guilty party for its actions— which may explain the low number of states that have adopted it. (As of 2003, only 12 states have adopted the statute in some form.) Other states have different statutes regarding false advertising. Most of these statutes require the courts to interpret state laws using federal guidelines provided by the (FTC). According to the FTC, which amended its standards to help regulate cigarette labeling, three elements are necessary to show that an advertisement is false or unfair.
The ad has to offend public policy; be immoral, unethical, oppressive, or unscrupulous; and substantially injure consumers. Types of False AdvertisingToday's regulations define three main acts that constitute false advertising: failure to disclose, flawed and insignificant research, and product disparagement. The majority of these regulations are outlined in the Lanham Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C.A. § 1051 et seq), which contains the statutes that govern trademark law in the United States.Failure to Disclose It is considered false advertising under the Lanham Act if a representation is 'untrue as a result of the failure to disclose a material fact.'
Therefore, false advertising can come from both misstatements and partially correct statements that are misleading because they do not disclose something the consumer should know. The Trademark Law Revision Act of 1988, which added several amendments to the Lanham Act, left creation of the line between sufficient and insufficient disclosure to the discretion of the courts.American Home Products Corp. Johnson & Johnson, 654 F. 568, S.D.N.Y. 1987, is an example of how the courts use their discretion in determining when a disclosure is insufficient.
In this case, Johnson and Johnson advertised a drug by comparing its side effects to those of a similar American Home Products drug, leaving out a few of its own side effects in the process. Although the Lanham Act does not require full disclosure, the court held the defendant to a higher standard and ruled the advertisement misleading because of the potential health risks it posed to consumers.Flawed and Insignificant Research Advertisements based on flawed and insignificant research are defined under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act as 'representations found to be unsupported by accepted authority or research or which are contradicted by prevailing authority or research.' These advertisements are false on their face.Alpo Pet Foods v. Ralston Purina Co., 913 F.2d 958 (D.C.
1990), shows how basing advertising claims on statistically insignificant test results provides sufficient grounds for a false advertising claim. In this case, the Ralston Purina Company claimed that its dog food was beneficial for dogs with canine hip dysplasia, demonstrating the claims with studies and tests. Alpo Pet Foods brought a claim of false advertising against Purina, saying that the test results could not support the claims made in the advertisements. Upon looking at the evidence and the way the tests were conducted by Purina, the court ruled not only that the test results were insignificant but also that the methods used to conduct the tests were inadequate and the results could therefore not support Purina's claims.Product Disparagement Product disparagement involves discrediting a competitor's product. The 1988 amendment to the Lanham Act extends claims for false advertising to misrepresentations about another's products. Trademark InfringementTrademark infringement is similar to product disparagement, and is described in section 32(1) of the Lanham Act.
This section states that:anyone who shall, without the consent of the registrant—(a) use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution or advertising of any goods or services or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or cause mistake, or to deceive shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant.A trademark is a symbol, phrase, or some other device that distinguishes ownership of a product or service. A trademark also stands as a mark of quality, which means that consumers rely on when making purchases. If one company adopts a trademark similar to a competing company, the public may think the trademark's owner either sponsored or approved the use of the trademark. Therefore, the reputation of the original holder of the trademark is compromised and consumers are deceived and confused by false advertising.In determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion under the Lanham Act, the courts use the Polaroid test, which includes eight factors established in Polaroid Corp.
Polara Electronics Corp., 287 F. 2d 492 (2nd Cir. They are the strength of the plaintiff's mark, similarity of uses, proximity of the products, likelihood that the prior owner will expand into the domain of the other, actual confusion, defendant's good or bad faith in using the plaintiff's mark, quality of the junior user's product, and sophistication of consumers. These eight factors do not all have to be satisfied to prove a case; the major factor the courts focus on is the potential to confuse consumers.The Polaroid test is for cases that involve commercial exploitation. When an advertising dispute involves violations, the issue at hand is often the use of.
ParodyFor parody cases, a test that is more useful than the Polaroid test was established by Cliffs Notes v. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 886 F.2d 490 (2nd Cir. The court held that Bantam's production of Spy Notes, which was a parody of Cliffs Notes study guides, was not a violation of the Lanham Act because Bantam clearly conveyed in advertising that Spy Notes was a parody.
Therefore, there was no confusion. As a result, the balancing test used by the court in Cliffs Notes requires that 'a parody must convey two simultaneous—and contradictory—messages: that it is the original, but also that it is not the original and is instead a parody.' If a parody does not have both messages, it is likely to confuse the consumers.Another claim involving parody is the 1995 case of Hormel Foods Corp. Jim Henson Productions, 73 F.3d 497 (2nd Cir. In this case, Hormel brought Jim Henson Productions to court for trademark infringement and false advertising under the Lanham Act. At the time the case was initiated, Henson was producing the movie Muppet Treasure Island with a new character: an exotic wild boar named Spa'am.
Henson's intention was to make the audience laugh at the intended parody between the Muppet's wild boar and Hormel's tame luncheon meat.Hormel's claims of false advertising and trademark infringement under the Lanham Act and its common-law claims of trademark dilution and deceptive practices were all denied by the court for several reasons, the main one being that Henson had clearly, in all his advertising, identified Spa'am as a character from a Muppet motion picture. This usage was not confusing under the Polaroid test and therefore was not a solid basis for a false advertising or trademark infringement claim. Henson's usage also satisfied the balancing test requirements set up by Cliffs Notes.
Remedies for False AdvertisingHad Hormel won its claim against Henson, three remedies would have been available to it: injunctive relief, corrective advertising, and damages.Injunctive Relief Injunctive relief is granted by the courts upon the satisfaction of two requirements. First, a plaintiff must demonstrate a 'likelihood of deception or confusion on the part of the buying public caused by a product's false or misleading description or advertising' ( Alpo). Second, a plaintiff must demonstrate that an 'irreparable harm' has been inflicted, even if such harm is a decrease in sales that cannot be completely attributed to a defendant's false advertising. It is virtually impossible to prove that sales can or will be damaged; therefore, the plaintiff only has to establish that there exists a causal relationship between a decline in its sales and a competitor's false advertising.
Furthermore, if a competitor specifically names the plaintiff's product in a false or misleading advertisement, the harm will be presumed ( McNeilab, Inc. American Home Products Corp., 848 F.2d 34 2nd.
1988).Corrective Advertising Corrective advertising can be ruled in two different ways. First, and most commonly, the court can require a defendant to launch a corrective advertising campaign and to make an affirmative, correcting statement in that campaign. For example, in Alpo, the court required Purina to distribute a corrective release to all of those who had received the initial, false information.Second, the courts can award a plaintiff monetary damages so that the plaintiff can conduct a corrective advertising campaign to counter the defendant's false advertisements. For example, in U-Haul International v. Jartran, Inc., 793 F.2d 1034 (9th Cir. 1986), the plaintiff, U-Haul International, was awarded $13.6 million— the cost of its corrective advertising campaign.Damages To collect damages, the plaintiff generally has to show either that some consumers were actually deceived or that the defendant used the false advertising in bad faith. Four types of damages are awarded for false advertising: profits the plaintiff loses when sales are diverted to the false advertiser; profits lost by the plaintiff on sales made at prices reduced as a demonstrated result of the false advertising; the cost of any advertising that actually and reasonably responds to the defendant's offending advertisements; and quantifiable harm to the plaintiff's good will to the extent that complete and corrective advertising has not repaired that harm ( Alpo).
Consumer ProtectionAlthough most false advertising claims brought against advertisers are by competitors, consumers can also file such claims. No hard-and-fast rules exist for all consumer-initiated cases; courts deal with claims brought by consumers on more of a case-by-case basis than they do with claims brought by competitors. The issues surrounding consumer rights were discussed during the drafting of the 1988 Trademark Law Revision Act, but were not resolved.In cases where consumers have sued, they have most often been held to the same standards as competitors: they need to show that they have a reasonable interest in order to be protected.
This standard was demonstrated by the lawsuit of Maguire v. Sandy Mac, 138F.R.D. In that case, the class included both resellers, who had purchased a ham product from the defendant, and consumers, who had ultimately bought the ham products.
The lawsuit claimed that the defendant sold ham products falsely represented as meeting u.s. Department of agriculture standards. The court ruled for the plaintiffs, saying that 'the plaintiff and the proposed class, the consumers, have a reasonable interest in being protected from criminal misrepresentations.' Another way consumers are protected is by state laws on deceptive trade practices. Some state laws define these practices as showing goods or services with the intention of not actually selling them as advertised. In Affrunti v. Village Ford Sales, 232 Ill.
3d 704, 597 N.E.2d 1242 (3rd. 1992), a consumer filed a lawsuit against an automobile dealership that sold him a car for more money than it was actually advertised for. Ronald Affrunti went to Village Ford Sales, a used-car lot, and looked at a blue 1986 Celebrity with 29,000 miles on the odometer. The car did not have a sticker price, so he asked the salesman, Fred Galaraza, for a price.
Galaraza answered that he would have to check in his office. After showing Affrunti several other used cars, and without going to his office, Galaraza quoted a price of $8,600 for the Celebrity. Affrunti and Galaraza settled on a final price of $8,524, which included a trade-in and a discount for a front-end alignment. Upon returning home, Affrunti came across an advertisement by Village Ford Sales for a 1986 blue Celebrity with 29,999 miles on the odometer for $6,995.
Affrunti called the dealership. Galaraza checked and said, 'By God, it's the same!' Affrunti asked to redo the deal based on the advertised price. Galaraza put him on hold. When Galaraza came back on the line, he said the car in the ad had been sent to auction, and they could not redo the deal because it was not the same car.At trial, the sales manager testified that prices listed in advertisements are not necessarily the listed cars' actual prices; dealers can sell the cars for higher prices.
After hearing the evidence, the judge ruled that the dealer had an obligation to inform the plaintiff of the advertised price of the car, and awarded Affrunti the difference between the purchase price and the advertised price, which amounted to $1,529. On appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court ruled that 'the defendant's failure to disclose the advertised sale price constituted deceptive conduct under the Act.' The appellate court also added attorneys' fees to Affrunti's award, bringing the total up to $1,937.50.
Further readingsBangert, Sharon J., Robert A. Cook, and Joseph D. 'Unfair and Deceptive Advertising of Consumer Credit.' The Maryland Bar Journal 35 (March–April): 8–13.Edelstein, Jeffrey S. False Advertising and the Law: Coping with Today's Challenges. New York: Practising Law Institute.Ippolito, Pauline M., and Janis K. Nutrition and Health Advertising: Evidence from Food Advertising, 1977-1997.
New York: Nova Science Publishers.Jacobs-Meadway, Roberta. 'False Advertising.' American Law Institute-American Bar Association C122 (April 3).Leighton, Richard J.
'Using (and not using) the Hearsay Rules to Admit and Exclude Surveys in Lanham Act False Advertising and Trademark Cases.' Trademark Reporter 92 (November-December): 1305–26.Postel, Theodore. 'Consumer Fraud Act: False Advertising of Used Cars.' Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (February 5).' Nextel Sues Verizon Wireless for False Ads.'
Forbes (September 23).Reddy, Anitha. 'Nike Settles With Activist in False-Advertising Claim.'
Washington Post (September 13). Cross-references.Want to thank TFD for its existence?, add a link to this page, or visit.Link to this page: False Advertising.