This is the old Locksmith business info area and will be broken down to fill in the new sections below.
by WOT » 29 Oct 2009 19:15
I think another thing is for the key shop is its relationship with the vendor.
Even if the patent is expired on Medeco keys and readily available in Ilco catalog, manufacturer-dealer contract might not allow them to blanketly duplicate restricted, yet Ilco available for-Medeco keys. If they do, they might lose authorized dealer status...
-
WOT
-
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 9 Nov 2006 21:44
- Location: (SFIC) USA
-
by ElAbogado » 2 Nov 2009 12:29
WOT wrote: Saw this thing somewhere. I disagree. Some smaller landlords use DND blanks or ask to have DND stamped on them but do not have a "company stationary". They'd then be locked out of making copies of their own keys. I suppose another interpretation of this is to figure out the keyway and bitting, then come in to have a fresh one made by code. Sans ordinance/regulations, I say the best policy is to ignore the bow stamps and if the blanks are in JET,Ilco or Kustom catalog, then it means duplication permitted. As an attorney and a locksmith, I cannot agree with your advice. Each jurisdiction has different laws regarding duplication of keys marked "do not duplicate" "duplication prohibited" "U.S. Property" etc. That addresses the issue of criminal law. Your failure to abide by these laws, ordinances, and regulations has a penalty attached. The real exposure here is in "tort" or civil law. Under the theory of common negligence, if one breaches a duty of care, and is the proximate cause of someone's injury, then they may be liable to that person for damages that flow from their actions. A good example would be Employee X goes to the local locksmith and requests a copy of his company key, a BEST lock, common keyway such as "A", but marked "Duplication Prohibited". Locksmith ignores the stampings and makes a copy of the key without asking any questions. Employee quits his job a week later, comes into the business, and cleans the place out. In this case, the locksmith has a duty to act reasonably in his business actions, which is making keys. He did not question Employee X, he just made the key. This is negligent behavior on his part. The owner of the business that suffered the loss will sue the locksmith for negligence. The standard of proof in this case is a "prepondence of the evidence", or "more likely than not" that the locksmith was negligent. One never knows how a jury will rule, but believe me, it's expensive even if you win, not to mention nerve wracking. For the couple of bucks you are going to make on this key duplication, it's not worth the potential hassle in court.
-
ElAbogado
-
- Posts: 226
- Joined: 28 Oct 2009 22:19
by FarmerFreak » 3 Nov 2009 8:36
ElAbogado, you have a reasonably compelling argument. But it begs the question. How many locksmiths have ended up in court over cutting non-patented "do not duplicate" stamped keys?
And of course the follow up question. What percentage of locksmiths were found guilty? I know, just ending up in court to begin with is a pain.
Another question would be. Would the original locksmith that stamped "do not duplicate" on a non-patented key end up in court as well. Since they "may" have negligently informed the customer that their keys now have some form of protection?
In the last 80+ years that the company I work for has been in business. They haven't once had to go to court over a "DND" headed key. So even though you may have a valid argument, experience is telling me otherwise. Which of course is why I ask the other questions.
-
FarmerFreak
-
- Posts: 737
- Joined: 21 Apr 2009 11:58
- Location: SLC, Utah
by ElAbogado » 3 Nov 2009 14:23
FarmerFreak wrote:ElAbogado, you have a reasonably compelling argument. But it begs the question. How many locksmiths have ended up in court over cutting non-patented "do not duplicate" stamped keys?
And of course the follow up question. What percentage of locksmiths were found guilty? I know, just ending up in court to begin with is a pain.
Another question would be. Would the original locksmith that stamped "do not duplicate" on a non-patented key end up in court as well. Since they "may" have negligently informed the customer that their keys now have some form of protection?
In the last 80+ years that the company I work for has been in business. They haven't once had to go to court over a "DND" headed key. So even though you may have a valid argument, experience is telling me otherwise. Which of course is why I ask the other questions.
First of all, guilty is a term used only in criminal cases, not in civil cases. It matters not whether or not the keyway is patented or a common keyway, a DND stamp is actual and/or constructive notice that the key should not be duplicated. If one duplicates this key, then it is up to a jury to determine if the offender is liable civilly to the plaintiff. I notice that you are in Salt Lake City, Utah. I suspect that your community is not as "sue happy" as we are in California. Just because you have never been sued for that before doesn't mean that it can't happen. Personally, I would love to have a plaintiff walk into my office who was the victim of an unauthorized duplication of a DND stamped key. That would be a fun case to try in front of a jury. As for being sued for stamping DND on a key and telling the customer that they have some form of protection, that also may be a basis for liability. I always informed the customer that it was to prevent honest people from duplicating the key. In the real world only a patented/restricted keyblank will slow duplication. With restricted Medeco keyways being duplicated on plastic credit card stock, I say "slow duplication" and not "prevent duplication." At the risk of sounding repetitive, the couple of bucks that you make duplicating a DND key for an unknown person is not worth the potential liability further down the road.
-
ElAbogado
-
- Posts: 226
- Joined: 28 Oct 2009 22:19
by WOT » 16 Nov 2009 18:42
ElAbogado wrote:As an attorney and a locksmith, I cannot agree with your advice.
How did you end up being an odd combination of attorney and a locksmith? Each jurisdiction has different laws regarding duplication of keys marked "do not duplicate" "duplication prohibited" "U.S. Property" etc. That addresses the issue of criminal law. Your failure to abide by these laws, ordinances, and regulations has a penalty attached.
My understanding is that such laws are confined to small areas and not many adopts it. In some counties in California, there is a restriction on duplicating "do not duplicate" keys, but that is a municipal ordinance, not valid beyond the county line. Additionally, some states have laws regarding duplicating keys to properties owned by or leased to state institutions or political branches of THAT state. If such was the case in State of California, hop over to NV and it's no longer an issue or if the keys go to a state building in state of NV and you're getting it duped in CA, it's also non-issue. The real exposure here is in "tort" or civil law. Under the theory of common negligence, if one breaches a duty of care, and is the proximate cause of someone's injury, then they may be liable to that person for damages that flow from their actions.
Just how far does this extend? Say you're a McDonald's clerk and you hear someone in the line yelling into his cell "hey, when I see you in a bit, I'm going to beat your a$$". He orders coffee. He scolds the person he was talking to with the coffee. Does that make McDonald's or clerk guilty of creating proximate cause of the customer's friend? A good example would be Employee X goes to the local locksmith and requests a copy of his company key, a BEST lock, common keyway such as "A", but marked "Duplication Prohibited".
It's a common knowledge in those familiar with Best keys and its third party logo free that stock blanks come pre-coined with "Duplication prohibited" or "it is unlawful to duplicate this key", which lessens the meaning behind it. Locksmith ignores the stampings and makes a copy of the key without asking any questions. Employee quits his job a week later, comes into the business, and cleans the place out.
How is this any different with a KW1, M1, SC1 DND? Tenant copies his key before he moves out. Uses the key two months later to clean out the new tenants belongings. Uses his M1 to clean out his former convenience store employer's outdoor ice box. In this case, the locksmith has a duty to act reasonably in his business actions, which is making keys. He did not question Employee X, he just made the key.
What is the level of questioning needed to exercise reasonable care? "Hi, Welcome to McDonald's, I overhead you were contemplating a violent action against someone, would you be using the coffee as a weapon?" If the clerk doesn't ask that question, does that make McD's negligent? This is negligent behavior on his part. The owner of the business that suffered the loss will sue the locksmith for negligence. The standard of proof in this case is a "prepondence of the evidence", or "more likely than not" that the locksmith was negligent. One never knows how a jury will rule, but believe me, it's expensive even if you win, not to mention nerve wracking.
Many apartment complexes use Best keys and many use Schlage SC1 and KW1. Often time, landlords stamp DND. If the customer says its to my apt door, dorm room, etc. KW1, SC1, 1A1G1, 1A1A1, etc makes for equally plausible claim. For the couple of bucks you are going to make on this key duplication, it's not worth the potential hassle in court.
Each couple of bucks per key, but it isn't just a couple bucks if you turn away every single request and send them to competitors unless the silly lettar of awwthoreezaytion
-
WOT
-
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 9 Nov 2006 21:44
- Location: (SFIC) USA
-
by ElAbogado » 16 Nov 2009 22:18
WOT wrote:ElAbogado wrote:As an attorney and a locksmith, I cannot agree with your advice.
How did you end up being an odd combination of attorney and a locksmith? Each jurisdiction has different laws regarding duplication of keys marked "do not duplicate" "duplication prohibited" "U.S. Property" etc. That addresses the issue of criminal law. Your failure to abide by these laws, ordinances, and regulations has a penalty attached.
My understanding is that such laws are confined to small areas and not many adopts it. In some counties in California, there is a restriction on duplicating "do not duplicate" keys, but that is a municipal ordinance, not valid beyond the county line. Additionally, some states have laws regarding duplicating keys to properties owned by or leased to state institutions or political branches of THAT state. If such was the case in State of California, hop over to NV and it's no longer an issue or if the keys go to a state building in state of NV and you're getting it duped in CA, it's also non-issue. The real exposure here is in "tort" or civil law. Under the theory of common negligence, if one breaches a duty of care, and is the proximate cause of someone's injury, then they may be liable to that person for damages that flow from their actions.
Just how far does this extend? Say you're a McDonald's clerk and you hear someone in the line yelling into his cell "hey, when I see you in a bit, I'm going to beat your a$$". He orders coffee. He scolds the person he was talking to with the coffee. Does that make McDonald's or clerk guilty of creating proximate cause of the customer's friend? A good example would be Employee X goes to the local locksmith and requests a copy of his company key, a BEST lock, common keyway such as "A", but marked "Duplication Prohibited".
It's a common knowledge in those familiar with Best keys and its third party logo free that stock blanks come pre-coined with "Duplication prohibited" or "it is unlawful to duplicate this key", which lessens the meaning behind it. Locksmith ignores the stampings and makes a copy of the key without asking any questions. Employee quits his job a week later, comes into the business, and cleans the place out.
How is this any different with a KW1, M1, SC1 DND? Tenant copies his key before he moves out. Uses the key two months later to clean out the new tenants belongings. Uses his M1 to clean out his former convenience store employer's outdoor ice box. In this case, the locksmith has a duty to act reasonably in his business actions, which is making keys. He did not question Employee X, he just made the key.
What is the level of questioning needed to exercise reasonable care? "Hi, Welcome to McDonald's, I overhead you were contemplating a violent action against someone, would you be using the coffee as a weapon?" If the clerk doesn't ask that question, does that make McD's negligent? This is negligent behavior on his part. The owner of the business that suffered the loss will sue the locksmith for negligence. The standard of proof in this case is a "prepondence of the evidence", or "more likely than not" that the locksmith was negligent. One never knows how a jury will rule, but believe me, it's expensive even if you win, not to mention nerve wracking.
Many apartment complexes use Best keys and many use Schlage SC1 and KW1. Often time, landlords stamp DND. If the customer says its to my apt door, dorm room, etc. KW1, SC1, 1A1G1, 1A1A1, etc makes for equally plausible claim. For the couple of bucks you are going to make on this key duplication, it's not worth the potential hassle in court.
Each couple of bucks per key, but it isn't just a couple bucks if you turn away every single request and send them to competitors unless the silly lettar of awwthoreezaytion
What you are asking here requires a rather long and verbose reply. Suffice it to say that you have a pretty good street level legal education. That's what keeps us lawyers busy. My advice was given to prevent potential future problems, you can take it or leave it. I know which way you will go....
-
ElAbogado
-
- Posts: 226
- Joined: 28 Oct 2009 22:19
by eppiotic » 22 Jan 2010 23:09
Having 'Do Not Duplicate' on a key is about as useful as the tag on your mattress that says "Do Not Remote Under Penalty Of Law".
But even though there is no law in our state that prohibits me from duplicating those keys, we do require written authorization on letterhead because of the intentions of original owner. But when you see a DND key with a non-descript head it does feel funny to say you can't copy it though, even when you can see that its a Schlage SC1 cut to 46522 that you could cut in your sleep.
Restricted keyways are another story entirely.
-
eppiotic
-
- Posts: 85
- Joined: 20 Mar 2008 15:32
- Location: Kansas City, MO
-
by yng_pick » 13 Mar 2010 13:08
I'd like to have a custom key that is stamped with:
"Key MUST be duplicated. Do NOT charge for duplication."
The shop I work for has no problem with duplicating these common keys (dnd kustom keys, lsda, best, etc) that have no key restriction, as it is not illegal to do so.
We try to make sure our customers are under no illusion as to the power that DND stamp holds. Thats what our ASSA, Medeco, and USLRx systems are for.
I think the worry is too small when you compare it to the myriad of things you can imagine up being sued for in your business. If you concentrate too much on them, it doesn't make sense to have a business at all. Especially considering the fact that it adds way to much to try and chase down every Kw1 DND that comes in, trying to determine if the person owns the place it goes to... which by the way, to determine it actually goes to that place.. won't you have to drive on over there and test the key out?
Anyways, we receive of these keys that I think the benefits over time outweigh the -slight- risk. Not only is there the keys sold- but more importantly, there are immediate and future sales dependent on explaining the truth of DND to customers, as well as the fact that we have a reputation in our town amongst quite a lot of people of 'if you have a key you need made, these guys got them'.
-
yng_pick
-
- Posts: 201
- Joined: 19 Aug 2005 14:23
- Location: Florida
by Evan » 11 Apr 2010 16:28
ElAbogado wrote:As an attorney and a locksmith, I cannot agree with your advice. Each jurisdiction has different laws regarding duplication of keys marked "do not duplicate" "duplication prohibited" "U.S. Property" etc. That addresses the issue of criminal law. Your failure to abide by these laws, ordinances, and regulations has a penalty attached.
Well in the case of certain keys like postal box keys and ones marked "U.S. Property Do Not Duplicate" the federal government had laws protecting those keys nation-wide... As far as "State Property Do Not Duplicate" those keys need to be marked to be identified as such and protected under the laws that the state has enacted to protect such keys... There are only two jurisdictions in the US which has a universal legal ban on copying keys marked "Do Not Duplicate" and those are NYC and LA... Again, the example given by WOT is exactly what would happen if a user possessed such a key and wanted it copied... Cross a state line where having the California key copied would not be illegal, you as an attorney know that state laws only apply within the state and do and can not apply outside of their jurisdiction... Therefore only Federally protected keys would be offered any sort of actual protection under these laws... ElAbogado wrote:The real exposure here is in "tort" or civil law. Under the theory of common negligence, if one breaches a duty of care, and is the proximate cause of someone's injury, then they may be liable to that person for damages that flow from their actions.
Where is the "duty of care" in this situation... It is laughable that you would suggest a locksmith or hardware store has any sort of duty, legal, ethical or otherwise to protect EVERY key in the world... If the key belonged to a system created by the locksmith making the duplicate key then you could have a point but that would depend on what was stipulated on the original agreement between the locksmith and the customer when the keying system was established... But for a random key that is walking in off the street that the locksmith shop can not identify as belong to a system that they service under contract for a customer then where is that duty of care ??? Under what you have proposed anyone who helps anyone do anything that results in some sort of liability or damage could be a co-defendant in a lawsuit... That is not the case... How many gas stations are sued for selling gas for the getaway car or for the guy who was drunk and crashed into someone else... Sure Booze is a part of it but without the gasoline in the tank enabling the person to drive the vehicle they use during the event that creates the damages or liability, they would not have been able to undertake such endeavors... Do you care to post case citations which apply nationwide which establish this "duty of care" on the part of a locksmith for those generic "Do Not Duplicate" keys ??? ElAbogado wrote:A good example would be Employee X goes to the local locksmith and requests a copy of his company key, a BEST lock, common keyway such as "A", but marked "Duplication Prohibited". Locksmith ignores the stampings and makes a copy of the key without asking any questions. Employee quits his job a week later, comes into the business, and cleans the place out.
In this case, the locksmith has a duty to act reasonably in his business actions, which is making keys. He did not question Employee X, he just made the key. This is negligent behavior on his part. The owner of the business that suffered the loss will sue the locksmith for negligence. The standard of proof in this case is a "prepondence of the evidence", or "more likely than not" that the locksmith was negligent. One never knows how a jury will rule, but believe me, it's expensive even if you win, not to mention nerve wracking.
LOL... So a BEST key, "A" keyway, with the factory coining on the blank... Why does the locksmith have a special "duty of care" in this situation that a hardware store which could also duplicate such a key does not ??? How do you prove the locksmith was negligent or that a "duty of care" was established to begin with, since you have not established any business or contractual relationship with the party that "owns" the key ??? What other information is stamped on the key that Employee X duplicated ??? It seems as if the owners of the key had a responsibility to PROACTIVELY establish protection for their keys by identifying them with unique code numbers on the key, a serialization code to ID the key to the employee AND establish contractual protections for their keys with all the local locksmiths and key cutting locations if such businesses were agreeable to such a contract... ElAbogado wrote:For the couple of bucks you are going to make on this key duplication, it's not worth the potential hassle in court.
Again, where do you establish this "duty of care" -- that is like saying that hardware stores are liable for when someone buys a pry bar and then subsequently uses it to engage in burglary... How to you establish the PRIOR KNOWLEDGE on the part of the seller of the tool or the copier of the key that it was to be used for malicious purposes ??? As long as copying a key brought in to a lock shop does not breach a contract with either a lock manufacturer/distributor OR an end user and there is no specific law protecting that key which is identified in a way so such law applies to it, then there is nothing protecting the key or its duplication... ~~ Evan
-
Evan
-
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: 5 Apr 2010 17:09
- Location: Rhode Island
by Evan » 11 Apr 2010 16:36
eppiotic wrote:Having 'Do Not Duplicate' on a key is about as useful as the tag on your mattress that says "Do Not Remote Under Penalty Of Law".
But even though there is no law in our state that prohibits me from duplicating those keys, we do require written authorization on letterhead because of the intentions of original owner. But when you see a DND key with a non-descript head it does feel funny to say you can't copy it though, even when you can see that its a Schlage SC1 cut to 46522 that you could cut in your sleep.
Restricted keyways are another story entirely.
So how do you tell for sure that the key brought in positively belongs to the entity identified on the letterhead ??? How do you know it is even real, or that the person using the letterhead is authorized to sign something and enter into a contract on behalf of that company ??? Do you know that by requiring the "letters of authorization" for duplication of keys that are not covered by some contract with a manufacturer and registered to an end user identified by codes stamped on the key itself, you might be exposing yourself to liability under the "duty of care" that ElAbogado discusses because you are making a customer produce an instrument of authorization to you which you are then bound to authenticate and therefore establish that the authorization is actually VALID prior to making the key since your own policy requires proof of authorization... ~~ Evan
-
Evan
-
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: 5 Apr 2010 17:09
- Location: Rhode Island
Return to Locksmith Business Information Archive 2003-2014
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
|