Savant Sues Crestron for Alleged Antitrust Violations
The complaint charges Crestron with violations of antitrust laws, including the Sherman and Clayton Acts, as well as violations of the Lanham Act and state unfair competition laws.
Savant’s complaint alleges that Crestron has unlawfully sought to exclude Savant from the network of dealers who purchase programmable controllers for residential and commercial automation, particularly high-end home automation.
The complaint alleges that Crestron’s conduct has included entering into exclusionary agreements with dealers which preclude them from offering Savant’s products, as well as threatening or financially “disincentivizing” dealers who offer or express interest in offering Savant products. It alleges that this conduct by Crestron “is calculated to restrain competition from Savant by precluding its access to the dealer network and to protect Crestron’s monopoly position in the market.”
The complaint also alleges that Crestron has repeatedly published knowingly false statements about Savant and its products, all with the intent to unfairly compete with Savant.
Alleged Threats and Intimidation of Dealers
Robert Madonna, CEO of Savant, told CE Pro exclusively, “It is important that dealers have the right to buy whatever equipment they want to buy. We didn’t do this lightly… we felt we had no other option at this point.”
He continues, “We believe that Crestron’s conduct has grown progressively worse. Savant is left with no option but to seek legal relief to protect Savant, its dealers, as well as end users who should enjoy the full range of choices among competitive products in the market.”
Madonna says some of Crestron’s documents are “outright lies” about Savant and its products. “It needs to stop. They have been threatening dealers.”
“The best result from this is at the end of the day, we are competing fairly in the marketplace,” he adds. Madonna did not want to elaborate with examples of specific threats at this time.
The lawsuit itself does not specify financial damages or ask for cease and desist rulings.
The lawsuit announcement was made well after business hours, so Crestron could not be reached for immediate comment. CE Pro has reached out to Crestron for a response to the lawsuit and will provide further developments as warranted. Update (10:45 AM): When contacted this morning about the complaint, Crestron marketing vice president Randy Klein said he had not heard anything about it.
Subscribe to the CE Pro Newsletter
Article Topics
News · Home Automation and Control · Control Systems · Legal · Savant · Crestron · Savant V Crestron ·About the Author

106 Comments (displayed in order by date/time)
If a company has a legitimate legal concern of course they should pursue litigation if necessary - but filing this the night before CEDIA starts really makes this look like a publicity stunt.
They will certainly get more attention at CEDIA this year.
I wouldn’t think this is a publicity stunt as the end user typically doesn’t follow Cepro anytime of the year. If this was published in a magazine the end user typically reads right before a big product announcement then maybe. The majority of my clients who have home automation just read the regular electronics magazine on the newsstand, they do not even know about the CEDIA Expo. As far as this trying to get Crestron dealers to go to Savant - it wouldn’t make sense as Crestron dealers would know if there is any merit to this (not that they could say so as they would probably be precluded from doing so). If anything, it would only be to sway a new company who is deciding between the two. If this were true then it would only get them a small amount of dealers as a frivolous lawsuit without actual documentation normally wouldn’t survive for an extended period of time. Filing a frivolous suit would greatly impact their ability to sign future dealers and hurt them in the long run. This leads me to believe the lawsuit has merit.
You actually think that it’s a coincidence that they filed this the night before CEDIA? That’s pretty thin….hey, I have this bridge I’d like to sell you in Brooklyn, you interested?
Like I said above, publicity stunt not likely. Publicity implies the general public. CI’s do not fall into this category. As you probably noticed my argument started out with the end user. I happened to transition into the other possible reasons after that one. I do believe it was a nice way to take a jab back at Crestron. However, logic still tells me their lawsuit has merit. I say good for them.
Surely is a publicity stunt. In the C.I world it surely fit under that criteria.. it doesn’t always have to be the whole “general public” because which average client would care anyway? we are the only ones that are aware of both brands so they expect more traffic in their stand by dropping this right before..
Anyhow anyone has that publication they refering to?
Wow people are just bypassing the second part of my argument and getting stuck on the publicity part. I guess we could spend all day debating the definition of the word publicity - but I think we all have better things to do. Still no one chiming in on the merit to their suit?
“However, logic still tells me their lawsuit has merit. I say good for them.”
I can see you don’t know much about this company.
Jeff,
Please explain your argument.
Not sure exactly how to respond to that one. What is your basis for that statement? Do you have past experiences with them that indicate they are reckless or in the habit of filing frivolous lawsuits?Please post if you do, as that would be the basis for an argument.
Timing is everything. Businesses don’t do announce things like this arbitrarily.
I do think this is frivolous. Crestron does have program goals, but they have never told us to stop selling AMX, RTI, Universal or Control4. There has never been an exclusivity contract, or any pressure from them except to meet sales goals. We do that easily, and still manage to be one of the top dealers for RTI.
I think Savant’s problem is they’re selling their systems like Control4, but at a Crestron price. They don’t really explain what they do very clearly, and the’re simply riding the coat tails of Apple’s recent success.
1: Savant has been doing apple based automation control before the ipad was in the spot light, why not have your system controlled by Apple which has proven itself as a stable platform….?
2. Savant is whole home automation, it controls audio, it controls video, it control HVAC, it controls lighting, all on on an Apple native interface. I’m not sure where the confusion is.
If Savant’s allegation that Crestron’s conduct has included entering into exclusionary agreements with dealers which preclude them from offering Savant’s products is false and they did so without any form of evidence to substantiate that claim then shame on them and they deserve whatever they get. However, I feel Savant is very smart with how they run their business (i.e. Manhattan Experience Center, presence at Lutron Experience Center in Manhattan, implementation of apple’s devices to control the system, programming interface, etc.) and it is very unlikely that they won’t be able to backup their allegation.




Ouch. Cant wait to see how this plays out. Any idea what crestron publications they are referring to?
How many dealers are there out there that can actually support both lines, properly? Seems like if a Crestron dealer is taking on Savant they are prepared to have their numbers drop… in half? How will they meet their quota?