(775) 786-6141
September 15, 2014:
October 15, 2014:
In April, I wrote a blog discussing the case of American Broadcasting Companies, Inc v. Aereo, Inc. The case had just been argued in front of the Supreme Court, so a decision was a couple of months off. On June 25, 2014, the Supreme Court finally issued its ruling with a 6-3 decision in favor of the broadcasting companies.
The majority’s decision found that Aereo did violate copyright law (I believe more specifically the 1976 Copyright Act). The Court also found that Aereo is basically a cable company, but didn’t necessarily call it a cable company in the ruling. What the six-justice majority didn’t buy into was Aereo’s arguments that they were simply renting equipment to customers instead of re-transmitting copyrighted material. Aereo’s use of thousands of tiny antennas each receiving an over-the-air signal did not sway the court.
The three-justice dissent was very skeptical of the majority’s decision (I guess this is often the case). Written by Justice Antonin Scalia, the opinion scoffed at the “looks-like-cable-TV” standard the majority used and accused the majority of putting together a “totality-of-the-circumstances test (which is not a test at all but merely assertion of an intent to perform test-free, ad hoc, case-by-case evaluation).” Justice Scalia basically argues that the Court is in a sense creating law: “It is not the role of this Court to identify and plug loopholes…[it is] the role of Congress to eliminate them if it wishes.”
The ruling effectively put Aereo out of business, or at least has them pausing their operations temporarily. However, Aereo does see some hope in the Supreme Court’s decision. Since Aereo is basically being called a cable company by the Court, maybe they should be treated the same as one and be allowed to keep operating if they pay the proper fees. 
Aereo did try its luck with the US Copyright Office and didn’t receive the warm response it was hoping for, but this argument is still to be heard in front of the court as the Supreme Court’s decision remanded the case back to a lower court. For now, all we can do is wait and see what will happen. My hope is Aereo is able to continue in some fashion so that we can see continued innovation and shake up in the traditional broadcast delivery methods.
On Tuesday the Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of American Broadcasting Companies, Inc v. Aereo, Inc. This case pits an Internet startup against the behemoths of the broadcasting world. At the heart of the case is basically whether or not Aereo can continue to be in business.
Let’s start at the beginning. Aereo is an Internet based company offering over-the-air broadcast television streaming to you on a multitude of devices. Simply, you pay Aereo a monthly fee to use one of their tiny antennas (about the size of a dime) and their DVR service. Each individual antenna receives over-the-air broadcasts and you schedule which programs to record and watch later. You can also stream the over-the-air broadcasts live. Basically, Aereo allows you to watch already free television at your convenience.
The major broadcasters (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC) don’t like what Aereo is doing. They feel Aereo’s business model violates US copyright law, specifically that they are retransmitting content without paying license fees. This is what the Supreme Court will have to decide. 
During oral arguments on Tuesday, the justices weren’t necessarily in Aereo’s corner, but they did express some worry that making a decision in favor of the broadcasters would have unintended consequences on current and future technology. The cloud computing and storage industry is particularly worried that a ruling in favor of the broadcasters could bring new legal liability on their businesses.
From what I’ve read, I’m in favor of Aereo. Their argument seems quite simple to me and I feel they are within the law. The broadcasters are not taking issue with an individual’s right to put up an antenna at their home and record over-the-air broadcasts with a DVR. They are taking issue with Aereo’s service doing this for individuals. Aereo claims, and lower courts have accepted, that each tiny antenna is operating independently and each person logged into the service and watching or recording is making use of a unique, independent antenna. I don’t see what the difference is between me setting up an antenna or Aereo setting up one for me and then streaming what is being received by the antenna. I guess we’ll find out in due time whether or not we’ll see Aereo come to the west coast or if they will simply disappear into the airwaves they are trying to harness.
When I last made noise on the BVCo. blog I was discussing my search for a cheaper cell phone bill. Well, I finally made a decision. I joined up with Republic Wireless and brought my phone bill down to $25 a month. 
This is $55 savings from the $80 a month bill I was previously paying. With these monthly savings I will recoup the cost of the new phone in about four months.
Let’s back up a second and I’ll give a refresher (or an introduction if you haven’t glanced at my last blog) as to what Republic Wireless is and what they offer. Republic Wireless is a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) using the Sprint network. What makes Republic Wireless unique is its use of WiFi calling and standard cell network calling. So, when I’m connected to a WiFi network all my calls and texts are received and delivered over WiFi. It’s a neat concept and is nice when you’re in areas where you have a WiFi connection and no cell coverage or if your cell coverage is just bad.
The real question is, though, how has my experience been with Republic Wireless? It’s been good. The phone (a Moto X) is fantastic, calls and texts over WiFi work great, and the monthly price is completely awesome. I was worried about my out of town coverage, but after traveling to some more rural areas of Nevada I feel pretty good about network coverage. I was actually roaming on the Verizon network, but I was still connected to a network and able to make calls. Ultimately, I just used WiFi networks whenever I was able to and had no problems staying connected.
There are some not so good parts to my experience so far, which was to be expected. The Sprint network has never been my favorite and after being on it for the last month and a half I am no bigger a fan. 
There are areas in Reno where cell coverage is just horrible. Also, Sprint’s 3G data speeds are ridiculously slow and, unfortunately, Sprint doesn’t have any 4G LTE coverage in the Reno area. One quirk of the Republic Wireless network is it is not able to receive or send short code text messages. These are the shortened numbers you see ads for that say send a text to this number to receive info or coupons. I actually rarely use them, but occasionally I will need to use short codes for online banking verification purposes. There are generally other ways to perform verifications, so not having short code access isn’t a huge deal.
All things considered, my first experiences with Republic Wireless have been overall positive. The phone works, the cell network works (mostly), and I pay much less for service. 
If you’re looking for a change in your monthly cell phone price, take a peek at Republic Wireless. I think you may find something you like.
How much do you pay for your cell phone monthly? I’m not on the most expensive plan, but I still pay nearly $80 a month. While the price of my plan hasn’t increased in recent years, primarily because I haven’t upgraded my phone, I still feel $80 is too much. 
On top of it currently being too expensive, if I decide to upgrade my phone at a subsidized price with my current carrier my monthly bill will go up (to about $100 per month), my unlimited data plan will go away and I will be locked into the carrier for another two years. So, over the past many months I’ve been agonizing over how I should change my cell phone plan in order to get a lower bill with reasonable cellular coverage. Here are some of the options I’ve come up with.
T-mobile has been one of the leading contenders for price and coverage. Their unlimited talk and text plans start at $50 per month with 500 MB of high speed 4G data and unlimited slower speed data after you hit the monthly cap. T-mobile has been pushing their ‘un-carrier’ branding, which is basically them trying to say we’re not like the other big carriers out there. 
The biggest difference T-mobile has right now is the customer pays for the phone outright. You can pay the entire cost upfront or finance it over a two year period. Once the phone is paid for you can cancel service at any time. It’s an interesting idea and much closer to the European cell phone market, but it still basically locks you in until the phone is paid off. With other carriers, long after your subsidized phone cost has been recovered by them you are still paying the same monthly price for your cell phone service. From a cost perspective, if I was to get a new phone and update my plan with my current carrier, it would cost approximately $900 more than going with T-mobile over a two year period.
The other potential contender is a relatively new company called Republic Wireless. 
Republic Wireless is a mobile virtual network operator (or MVNO) like Boost Mobile or Virgin Mobile. MVNOs do not own the cellular network infrastructure, but lease the use of a cellular network to build their mobile operation. The unique selling points for Republic Wireless are the cost and the use of WIFI calling in addition to traditional cellular network calling. To start, you buy the phone outright. 
There isn’t much selection, but their top end phone right now is the Moto X which will set you back $300 (this is cheaper than buying the phone at full price from other carriers). From there you can pick from four different plans that go for $5, $10, $25 or $40. These plans range from being WIFI calling only to having regular cellular coverage with 4G data. 
Of those plans, the $25 plan fits my needs as I will get regular cell service with 3G data and access to Republic Wireless’ unique WIFI calling. If I was to get this same phone and update my plan with my current carrier, it would cost approximately $1600 more over a two year period. That is not an insignificant amount.
With both of these options there are drawbacks of course. T-mobile has decent coverage in the Reno/Sparks area, but I know when I leave metropolitan areas I will definitely not get the coverage I currently get with Verizon. Republic Wireless runs off the Sprint network, which is probably the last carrier I would choose if I was going for one of the four network operators (ATT, T-mobile and Verizon being the other three). Republic Wireless also has the downside of having virtually no phone selection and because of their unique WIFI calling feature the phone is locked to them and can’t be brought to other carriers. So, now I have to weigh the downsides, which are less financially impactful, with the savings I could have by switching to a different carrier from my current one. I’m not quite sure what I’m going to do, but I’d love to know what you think and what your experiences have been with different carriers.
In an article published last week (“A Reno Neighborhood Drinks in Style”), The New York Times declared “Reno is now a city of sustenance as well as indulgence.” This declaration came after some enthusiastic and positive writing on the happenings of Midtown District businesses.
The article wandered from the Old Granite Street Eatery to Reno Public House to Hub Coffee Roasters, while also stopping over at other fine Midtown establishments along the way (Brasserie Saint James, Death and Taxes, and more). So, if an East Coast newspaper the likes of The New York Times is profiling an up and coming part of Reno, have we made it?
Yes, we have made it, but not because of The New York Times. Midtown, downtown and many parts of Reno/Sparks have made it because of the people creating the businesses and citizens of the area supporting them.
At the same time, I can’t complain about good press at the national level. It really is quite awesome.
One thing I have to say about The New York Times’ declaration: It isn’t just “now” that we have become a city of sustenance as well as indulgence. I feel Reno has been that way for some time. Reno has definitely had an explosion of restaurants and bars of late, but we’ve had restaurants that can sustain or indulge us for as long as I can remember. Bricks, La Vecchia and Rapscallion come to mind; so do Peg’s Glorified Ham n Eggs, Silver Peak and Great Basin Brewing Co. Let’s not forget the myriad sushi places we have in town (all you can eat, of course) and the multitude of Chinese, Thai and Vietnamese restaurants. 
Reno has even had an Ethiopian restaurant for some years (Zagol; it’s quite good!).
I’ve digressed a bit from talking about Midtown, but as you can see, the Reno/Sparks area is alive with great restaurants and bars. So the next time you are heading out for food, think about giving the Midtown area a try. I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.
I’m going to talk a little baseball today. It’s been on my mind since hearing about it and then watching a recap of the eventful New York Yankees/Boston Red Sox game on Sunday, August 18. I know most everyone hates Alex Rodriquez, public enemy number one in the baseball world, but just indulge me.
For those unaware, Alex Rodriquez and twelve other players were suspended by Major League Baseball in early August due to their connection with Biogenesis, a Florida “anti-aging” clinic, and for their alleged (and now admitted) use of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs). 
Rodriguez was given a 211 game suspension, while the twelve others were all given 50 game suspensions, effective immediately. Rodriguez’s suspension would have taken him all the way through the 2014 regular season. Simple enough. He may very well deserve every game he is suspended. However, under the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the players and Major League Baseball, players have the right to appeal their suspension and continue playing until the appeals process has finished. Alex Rodriguez has appealed and has returned to playing for the Yankees. I know people hate this; I know players hate this. But let the man have his due process. The CBA lays out the rules of how contracts work in MLB. Deal with it and stop complaining. (Yes, you can have an opinion, but I’m done listening to those who think he shouldn’t be playing.)
So, what about that “eventful” game from Sunday, August 18? Well, the starting pitcher for the Boston Red Sox, Ryan Dempster, apparently doesn’t approve of Alex Rodriguez. In the second inning, Dempster plunked Rodriguez on the fourth pitch. This was after he pitched behind Rodriguez on the first pitch and then threw two more pitches inside. It seemed pretty obvious to me that this was an intentional hit. The sportscasters calling the game agreed it was, too (give a watch and listen; those Red Sox fans sound horrible cheering when A-Rod gets hit). 
Okay, players get intentionally hit for all sorts of reasons, but come on, four pitches! He made his intentions beyond obvious, even though he is not admitting to it. I would have thought this obviousness would have gotten Dempster an ejection, but no, the home plate umpire Brian O’Nora simply gave warnings to both dugouts. Yankee manager Joe Girardi stormed onto the field and let O’Nora have it (rightfully so) and was subsequently ejected from the game. Rodriguez took his base and then exacted his revenge in the fifth inning when he cranked a solo shot. The Yankees ended up coming from behind and winning, so Dempster may have just ignited a third place Yankee team at the wrong time of the season (Red Sox slugger David Ortiz agrees with this idea).
Luckily, MLB decided to suspend Dempster, but unfortunately for only five games. Five games for a pitcher is no problem. He doesn’t pitch every night and by the time the five games go by he’ll be fresh for his next start. It’s like no suspension happened. The suspension is weak and should have been for more games. At least there was a suspension. No action from MLB would have implied approval that it is okay to hit Alex Rodriguez. The suspension makes some kind of statement and says there are consequences for your actions. Alex Rodriguez will most likely suffer the consequences of his actions soon enough, but let him have his due process. In the mean time, how about you just pitch to him and strike him out to show that you don’t respect him.
It’s my turn again. The dreaded blog is due. What to write always seems to drive the “dreaded” part of a “blog is due.” So, I fired up Google News and started reading away. 
There was definitely much to write about, but I wanted something local. Clicking on the News Near You section didn’t highlight any particularly interesting articles, but it did remind me to take a peek at the Reno Gazette-Journal’s website (yes, sometimes there is more than just pictures of events). Since I don’t actually have an RGJ subscription, I was limited by the number of articles I could read. So, I proceeded carefully and looked for an article about something local to click on. I was intrigued when I stumbled across the title “Reno Rebirth: Could downtown Reno be a home for students?” I clicked away and was happy to discover a blog filled with all things Reno. (Oh, and the blog isn’t limited by having a subscription or not.)
Reno Rebirth is a blog “devoted to Reno’s economic recovery.” Reading that tagline would make one primarily think about business, but economic recovery relates to all aspects of life and Reno Rebirth makes that clear. 
Blogs are posted a few times a week from a variety of writers with topics ranging from Reno being a city where people are active and exercise to the number of arrests made at the 2012 Santa Crawl. The blog does allow for comments via Facebook login, so people are adding their opinions to the blog as well. There is also a Twitter feed on the main page where you can catch some additional local information. Here are a couple of blog posts I found interesting:
With food, nightlife and easy access to campus, downtown living looks like it could be a nice addition to student housing options.So, if you have some time, take a peek at the Reno Rebirth blog and don’t forget to keep an eye out for Barnard Vogler’s weekly blog, too.
It’s that time of year again: The weather is warming, the skies are blue, let’s grab some grub at Reno Food Truck Fridays to feed that hunger in you. My horrible rhyming aside, this bimonthly, gastronomic event is back in town. Setting up shop every first and third Friday of the month, Reno Food Truck Fridays (RFTF) is a great way to get outside, indulge in a variety of gourmet food, and listen to local music. The next RFTF is Friday, May 17, but if you can’t make it then the event goes through October, so there are plenty more Fridays ahead.
RFTF takes place downtown at CitiCenter Plaza, 40 E. 4th Street (the corner of 4th and Center), which is the former RTC bus terminal. It runs from 5-9 p.m., so you can head there right after work or rest up a bit before heading downtown. You could even make a whole evening of it and catch a Reno Aces game.
This year’s lineup of food trucks includes: GourMelt Grilled Cheese, Kenji’s, Sauce Wagon, Red Truck Tahoe, Traffic Jam, Mellow Yellow Food, Lazy Sundae, Battle Born, Waffle Wagon, St. Lawrence Pizza Co., Island Ice, Mount MoGrit, and Taster’s Paradise (check out Reno Tahoe Food Trucks for some of the menus from the aforementioned trucks). 
There is also the Tumblebus and a beer garden courtesy of Great Basin Brewing Co. (according to Standley White of About.com). New this year will be The Biggest Little Fashion Truck which will be selling designer clothes and accessories. Now you can shop and eat at the same time in downtown Reno.
So, if you’re looking for something different and a chance to support local businesses, head downtown to Reno Food Truck Fridays. Here’s the upcoming schedule:
Make sure to check RFTF’s Facebook page for any changes or special announcements.
Now that we are in the thick of tax season, I have to say…I’m tired. No, not of work. I’m physically and mentally tired, mainly because I don’t get enough sleep during the night. 
Longer work days and longer work weeks have made my available sleep time appear to diminish. (Oh, and let’s not get started about daylight saving time; I’ve been cursing it all week. I do like sun in the evenings, though.) In order to combat diminishing sleep time, I think we need naps during the work day.
How does that sound? Twenty minutes or so during the day in a quiet, dark room. You wake up feeling refreshed and productivity increases. That is a winning combination. It seems like a cost effective and easy solution to get better and more work out of everyone. The trick is to convince those in charge that naps really are a good thing. Oh, yeah, and have a room (or a pod)
where you can nap.
This whole idea isn’t a joke, either. I constantly hear and read stories about Americans being perpetually tired. In the USA Today article linked above, health experts are quoted as saying “worker fatigue is an epidemic that is weighing on workers’ health and productivity.” It only makes sense that a constant lack of sleep would take its toll and a recent study is showing that sleeping insufficient hours can lead to eating more and weight gain. Take the study for what it’s worth, but getting more sleep at night sounds like the right thing to do.
Where does that leave my argument now? I just said that getting more sleep at night is the right thing to do after previously arguing for naps during the work day. I would have to say, ultimately, becoming better rested and finding more time to sleep is up to me (the individual). While I surely wouldn’t mind a chance to nap once in a while, I really should focus on getting to bed earlier and at a consistent time. 
We should all shut down those electronic devices earlier (TV included) and turn off the lights. So, for now, I’ll work harder at taking care of myself, but to all those in charge reading this: naps during the work day equal increased productivity.
