April 13, 2013 • By Dennis Beaver

“Mr. Beaver, I recall an article you wrote some years ago about the popular active noise-cancelling headphones sold by Bose, Sony and others. You were critical, and it seemed of the opinion that many of their ads were close to being false advertising. In researching this topic online, I’ve found a number of stories which also cast doubt about the wisdom of spending hundreds of dollars for these headphones.

“But today, are there any noise-reducing headphones which you can recommend? Six members of our family are planning a really big trip overseas to several European cities. If we can get something that you feel works, and is good value, that’s just fine by us! Thanks. Bertie, Hanford, California.”

We’ve all seen ads which picture a smiling airline passenger, wearing brand X active noise-cancelling headphones. Just put them on, and you are led to believe that silence will result, allowing you to listen to music, undisturbed by the roar of a jet engine, train, subway, passengers talking and children crying.

But there is just one teensy, weensy problem with that picture. It isn’t true, no way near with any consumer active noise-cancelling headset available on the market which we have been able to find.

If you want real quiet, industrial earmuff or earplug-type hearing protection does exist which takes that airplane environment — engines, people, kids and all — and the wearer will hear what would amount to little more than a whisper and does it without batteries.

Now, before we give you brand information, a little theory is important to understand, and Dr. Theresa Y. Schulz, Ph.D., Lt. Col. USAF (retired), hearing conservation manager for Honeywell Safety Products/Howard Leight Hearing Protection, gave us this brief explanation:

Active versus passive noise reduction

“There are two ways to reduce sound in general and protect your hearing:

• We can muffle or block it out with high-quality earplugs or specially designed earmuffs which are effective across most of the frequencies of sounds that we hear, from low to high. The figures we use to describe such noise reduction would have a noise reduction rating (NRR) of 25-30 decibels, lowering the din of an aircraft cabin to that of a quiet conversation. That is called passive noise reduction.

• Active noise cancellation refers to headphones which “listen” to undesirable low frequency sound — such as the growling of a jet engine, road noise or HVAC system — and electronically creates an opposite sound wave, cancelling the offending noise.

“Active noise cancellation is only effective for steady, continuous, low frequencies and was first developed for use by the military, in aviation, and especially in cargo aircraft. By itself, it does nothing to reduce higher frequency noise, such as people talking, children crying, much of the noise that you want to avoid, especially when in an airplane and just want to listen to music.

“Also, the electronics tend to introduce a peculiar hissing — and sound pressure — which can be highly irritating. Finally, when the batteries die, many of these headphones don’t work at all — so you hear as if you were using nothing.

“And that of course explains why many people are disappointed after they have purchased expensive headphones and still hear much of what they wanted to avoid,” she notes.

There is a solution

So, the ideal, affordable noise-reducing headphones would work on both the low frequencies, as well as all the other noises we don’t want to hear, would not need batteries and would just let you plug them into a music source, without cranking the volume up to eardrum-shattering levels. Technically, for that you need something with an NRR number above 25 decibels to block unwanted noises across many frequencies.

When something comes on the market which addresses a real consumer need, we think it’s important to bring it to your attention. Such headphones do exist and are called Sync Stereo Earmuff by Howard Leight, available on Amazon for $22. (You read correctly.)

The sound is excellent — not audiophile quality, but awfully good — plus they are comfortable, and at their 25 decibels of across-the-board noise reduction, when price and performance is considered, you would be hard pressed to find anything better for use in noisy environments, from mowing the lawn, vacuuming the house or travel.

We can also highly recommend extreme isolation headphones manufactured by Direct Sound Headphones of St. Louis. With NRR numbers of 25 and 29, they are very quiet. These are true audiophile products, intended for use by musicians and the recording industry where accuracy of sound is critical. They still cost far less than many of the highly advertised “active” types and just sound better than any of them to our testers.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Active noise-cancelling headphones confusion appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

June 9, 2026  • By Dennis Beaver

If you were in construction or agriculture in the late 1990s to early 2000s, chances are that the name Nextel calls up fond memories.

They developed a walkie-talkie-type push-to-talk cell phone that was very popular back then. With that kind of phone, you could instantly contact others on the same network and also place regular cell calls.

Smartphone technology passed Nextel by, and the company went out of business in mid-2013.

Today, several companies are selling Push-to-Talk over Cellular (PoC) devices, and one in particular, in my legal opinion, is engaging in misleading and fraudulent advertising.

That company is Rapid Radios, whose ads pop up on computer screens and can be heard on satellite radio.

Rapid Radios, based in Grand Rapids, Michigan, sells what it falsely claims are “walkie-talkies.” Its ads repeatedly state their radios provide nationwide coverage, with unlimited range, no matter where you are. They’re $399 for a pair.

Please take a moment and do a Google search for “Rapid Radios scam.”

What pops up will tell you that the company has been criticized for misleading marketing about its push-to-talk walkie-talkies. The radios are advertised as independent, off-grid devices, but they actually function identically to cell phones — they require LTE cell towers to transmit signals and will not work if all cell service fails. (If one carrier’s cell service fails, they can switch to another carrier’s service, though. But if all cell service is down, you’re out of luck.)

Now, watch this Rapid Radios Facebook ad and pay close attention to the first few words.

Did you catch that? “Rapid Radios, they work wherever you are.”

They do not — you must have access to an LTE tower.

Their ads also do not tell you that these devices can call only others that are mated to it — one or a group of devices — but no one else.

Here is an ad you will never see

Have you ever seen an ad from Samsung, Motorola, Apple, Google or any cell phone manufacturer that says that, with their cell phone, you have unlimited range and can talk to anyone, even those who are thousands of miles away?

Of course not, and you never will, as “range” is irrelevant to how far a call on a cell phone will reach. Connect to a cell tower, and you can call anywhere in the world. If you are in an area with no cell service, your call will not connect.

Walkie-talkies that are not walkie-talkies

The radios they show as making it possible to speak with Rapid Radios employees more than a thousand miles away are not walkie-talkies, and their advertising creates the impression that this is something truly revolutionary in two-way radio communication.

Ask Google Gemini what a walkie-talkie is, and it says: “A walkie-talkie, formally known as a handheld two-way radio, is a portable device used for instant, wireless voice communication. These devices operate by transmitting and receiving radio waves, allowing multiple people on the same channel to communicate directly, radio-to-radio, entirely without the need for cellular networks or internet service.”

Comments on Trustpilot

This May 2026 comment on the consumer review platform Trustpilot is nearly identical to many others I found online: “No way to leave a ZERO star review. No monthly service fees – NO Contracts – NO BS. This is a VERY DECEITFUL motto. Radios DO have a YEARLY fee. Which equal a contract. Next, it will NOT work without a paid fee, if cellular towers go down, the radio does NOT work.”

The company says on its website that there is no monthly fee, and that is true. But there is an annual fee after the first year to maintain service on each radio.

Rapid Radios’ advertising states that Fortune 500 companies, local police and fire departments, the Department of Homeland Security and Border Patrol use the devices. I could find no support for those claims. And I seriously doubt the DHS and Border Patrol use them, as they would almost certainly have highly secure digital radios.

I wrote to the company to ask for proof. There was no response. Some people would say, “No response is a response.”

At the bottom of its website, the company notes in very fine print: “Nationwide coverage available when in range of LTE tower.”

We again turned to Gemini to define “LTE tower.” It said, “An LTE tower (often referred to as a cell tower, cell site or base station) is the physical structure and equipment that transmits and receives radio signals to connect your mobile devices to the broader internet and cellular network.”

My recommendations

The idea of PoC isn’t new, as I mentioned earlier. Today, there are a handful of companies that sell PoC radios, and the radios that I consider standouts and recommend for most consumer applications are from Poclink (I have not been paid to endorse these products).

Technology aside, the company’s ads are honest. For example, they say: “Powered by PoC technology, Poclink lets you talk with your family or team — across cities, states or countries — far beyond the limits of traditional walkie-talkies.”

Poclink, like all current PoC devices, including Rapid Radios, can access AT&T, T-Mobile, TELUS and other global network carriers.

However, if there’s no cell coverage available, the user of a Poclink device can switch to off-grid, analog, radio-to-radio communication that can maintain connections in a very limited geographic area. Some of their devices can access Starlink satellites in cellular dead zones.

(It is important to note that I do not accept “freebies” and return any product or device that is sent to me for potential review.)

Possible legal — civil and criminal — consequences

In my legal opinion, Rapid Radios’ campaign of misleading advertising should interest state attorneys general, county prosecutors and the Federal Trade Commission — they should come down hard on them.

These types of cases can be brought both criminally and civilly against the owners of a company and employees who actively take part in the fraud, such as by appearing in misleading ads.

Any company that engages in such massive false advertising could end up in bankruptcy, which, if you buy their product, could wipe out service, warranty obligations and prepaid services.

The many online complaints and videos about Rapid Radios should not be ignored.

Dennis Beaver Practices law in Bakersfield and welcomes comments and questions from readers,
which may be faxed to (661) 323-7993,
or e-mailed to Lagombeaver1 – at – Gmail.com.

The post Are This Company’s Ads About Its Push-to-Talk Devices Misleading? In My Legal Opinion, Yes, They Are appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Are you about to enter law school or know someone who is? While law school is demanding and some say “boring,” at many schools technology is making the hours spent studying more productive, practical, and fun. In a moment you’ll see why, but first, here’s an email we received from “Chad,” a happy father in Eureka, California:

“Mr. Beaver, my wife and I have been on cloud nine, unbelievably thrilled and proud of our daughter, ‘Angie’s acceptance at one of California’s top law schools, but also, really worried. I know that law school is tough and there is a high failure rate at some schools. Angie put the ‘up’ in uptight, and already she is worried. Can you help put her fears to rest?”

Angie’s lucky – her school uses Casebook Connect.

We learned that Angie is attending law school in the San Francisco Bay area, and that several of her first-year courses benefit from something very cool offered by law book publishers that law students across the country describe as “simply amazing, making things so much more clear and understandable.”

It’s Casebook Connect from Wolters Kluwer and the Interactive Casebook Series from West Publishing.

Now, before we tell you what they are, join me as we step into H.G. Wells’ Time Machine, and take a little trip, 40 years back in time. Our guide is Vikram Savkar, Boston-based Vice President and General Manager of Wolters Kluwer’s Legal Education Group.

“Dennis, if you walked onto the campus of any law school in the country over the past 40 years, the same scene would be repeated. Students would be lugging around briefcases filled with heavy casebooks. But then, five years ago, we realized that something had changed,” he began.

“It was the students who had changed, because those entering law school were digital natives. They had grown up with Google, Facebook, and as undergrads, had used a great deal of technology on a regular basis.”

A challenge to legal publishers

Having grown up with technology, and “Suddenly in law school using only thick books was a bit of a shock to these tech-savvy students,” Savkar points out, adding, “The need for something better was clear. Law school is very hard and students felt there were tools that could greatly improve the learning experience, but were not then available.”

So, the publishers of casebooks used in our nation’s law schools asked themselves a question: “How can we bring cutting edge educational technology into the world of casebooks, helping today’s law students succeed in mastering the material, developing confidence for both law school exams and the Bar Examination?”

The Interactive Casebook Series, both developed after years finding out from students and teachers how technology could facilitate law study. Both publishers hit a home run and “Professor Beaver” is impressed.

“Beaver, back to work! Stop playing!”

These publishers bring to law students what amounts to their own private tutor, applying the legal concepts and terminology acquired from the casebook to challenging real life and hypothetical fact situations. Law school is fascinating to begin with, but these two legal publishers have made learning the law fun.

It’s like having someone saying, “We’ve been studying the types of contracts which must be in writing in order to be enforced and ways to get around that written requirement. So, after reading this hypothetical, tell me if Ms. Jones will be able to successfully argue that, even though there was nothing in writing, her client should still be able to claim that a valid contract was created?”

The student is given a series of possible arguments to use and clicks on, we hope, the right answer. Immediately the correct answer appears, along with the legal reasoning to support the point. There is no more “hiding the ball,” which is one of the greatest criticisms of the way law is still taught at some schools. Here, the material studied is reinforced in a variety of positive ways, so if you are wrong, you are not made to feel like a dummy.

In preparation to be a guest instructor at the Bakersfield campus of the Monterey College of Law, Savkar sent me a log-on password to the casebook, Epstein on Torts, giving access to the complete book and the simply marvelous study aids that Casebook Connect offers.

This did not make my office staff very happy, as I was like a kid in a candy store, shutting my door, having a ball, bouncing around the text and hypothetical, visuals and tests–and it was all so interesting, so well put together. You just have to admire the thought put into this user-friendly technology.

So, Angie, you can worry much less. Law school is terrific!

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Are you headed to law school? appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

“Mr. Beaver, I’ve been reading about AI — Artificial Intelligence — and Chat GPT that you can talk to and which, because of its enormous database, can actually function as a lawyer, providing advice or even help you manage a lawsuit that you are involved in at present. Is this for real or is it just hype?

“I need to know this because I was just sued by a former employer and have to defend myself. Thanks for your help, ‘Ben.’”

If you have heard that AI and the chatbot ChatGPT is a replacement for an actual attorney, I suggest that you watch the 1968 film, 2001 A Space Odyssey, where the human-sounding HAL computer — which is an actual crew member on this ship — loses its mind with disastrous results.

Imitates Human Conversation

San Francisco-based OpenAI made the ChatGPT chatbot that mimics human conversation available for free public testing on Nov. 30 last year. The ChatGPT is quite amazing, and you’ve probably seen news stories on the scope of what it can do, from writing term papers to creating poetry and writing legal pleadings.

I ran the question of what impact will AI will have on access and the delivery of legal services by Southern California trial lawyers Brian Kabateck and Shant Karnikian.

AI highly useful for things that are standardized

“Artificial Intelligence robots are useful in drafting things that are standardized, such as creating leases and contracts — things of a transactional nature. But are far less in a litigation context where many elements are individualized. Where there is a dispute between parties that can’t be standardized — as each matter and the wrongs that are done to people are different — this is where I doubt a computer will ever replace juries who can deal with damages on an individualized basis,” Shant said.

“That said, in the litigation world, AI will be helpful assisting with logistics such as notices that go out, answering questions based on non-subjective facts, such as: ‘When is the hearing? When will the checks be disbursed?’”

Be skeptical of ‘cost effective’ lawyers because they use AI

Kabatek: There is a substantial amount of reasoning, human review and discretion that lawyers are trained to do. I would be suspicions of lawyers who claim that they can get things done much more quickly because they have AI doing all the work.

Where you hire an attorney to draft a contract or any document that is important to your future, you’ve got to be sure that someone is actually looking at it, otherwise, what are you paying them for?

Shant: In its present form it is doubtful that AI can find the smoking gun.

In litigation there are times when you need legal research to support an argument and one lawyer in the room was the only person to spot it even though AI was used as a research tool. From what I have seen of computerized legal research — which is a form of AI — it is not good at finding those little nuances in appellate decisions that make a huge difference.

But that is what a lawyer’s experience brings to the table; finding a case that might not be relevant on point but makes an analogous argument. Perhaps AI will evolve and do that, but for now that’s where I have concerns. How do I know that it went through everything in supporting some critical argument?

What Clients Must Watch Out For

Brian: How are you being billed?

(1) Make sure that you are not being charged the lawyer’s regular rate if AI was actually doing the work.

(2) You want a lawyer who is sure that what the AI generates is correct. That will be a factor at some firms that rely solely on AI. The lawyer has an ethical responsibility to oversee any work that is being done by AI. I can see real problems and potential malpractice suits against lawyers who accepted cases outside of their area of practice and relied on AI to manage the case.

A lawyer who accepts a case that gets into an area of the law he is completely unfamiliar with runs the risk of committing malpractice and doing the client real harm.

(3) AI will not turn you into an instant lawyer! You will not know what you missed! Dennis, your reader sounds as if he plans to use AI and AI alone to defend him in this lawsuit. This is like taking out you own appendix when you haven’t attended medical school.

Avoid law firms heavily marketing the fact that all their work is done through AI or for use of some software they claim to make themselves more efficient.

Both lawyers caution: “Avoid anyone who, as their No. 1 marketing gimmick, advertises, “We will only charge you so much because we use AI.”

Good advice.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Be wary of robots in your legal future appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

If you are looking for a new digital camera, chances are good that you’ll research prices online and make a few phone calls. That’s just what amateur photographer Marsha Kay of San Luis Obispo did when shopping for a Canon EOS 40D in January, 2008.

Marsha’s story is proof of what happens when we either don’t see or choose to ignore warning signs which just don’t make sense.

On a deeper level, it is testimony as to how con artists are so successful by appealing to our search for a bargain — sometimes plain greed, our greed. Criminal success is assured when we allow common sense and normal curiosity to be overruled by a tempting deal.

Let’s not shake on that

Like other quality camera manufacturers, Canon sells high-tech lenses which eliminate blur caused by “camera shake.” Especially where you have a zoom or telephoto lens or just aren’t that steady with a camera in your hands, if you’re going to get a new Digital camera, buy a lens with a built-in stabilizer.

“That feature was extremely important to me,” Marsha explained, “as I have had a tremor in my arms since about age 20, so often pictures I’ve taken turn out blurry because of this shaking.”

Marsha wanted a Canon 40D, which, like all Digital SLR cameras, can be purchased with or without a lens for customers who already own other lenses. The 40D (body only) can be found online at a number of legitimate stores for about $1,200.

She spent hours online, and found the Canon 40D at “Best Price Cameras” for an incredible: $429!

That low price was the first sign that something was wrong. If the same item is offered for sale by other stores at prices which are fairly close, and suddenly one seller has it for two thirds less, it is most likely an invitation to Bait and Switch.

“Best Price Cameras had a package (#14) for $1,219 which included the camera, two stabilized Canon lenses, and other accessories, which was the lowest price anywhere,” she added.

In fact, these prices were too good to be true. I have learned that Best Price Camera did not even have those Canon lenses in stock, and would not have them for two to three months — if ever! But they never told her that.

Bait and switch easy to spot

The salesman Marsha spoke with “seemed to be knowledgeable and polite, telling me the lenses in the package were not that good and you should upgrade to other Canon lenses with stabilizers.”

At that point, unaware she was hearing the beginnings of a classic Bait and Switch, instead of taking a time out, ending the call and researching both Best Price Cameras and his statement about those Canon lenses being of “poor quality,” Marsha placed an order, falling into their trap.

So, let’s stop right at the moment Marsha was told, “These lenses aren’t that good.” This is a typical start of a Bait and Switch, where the customer has (1) fallen for the low, advertised “Bait,” and is next; “Switched” to a much more expensive, and frequently, lesser quality item.

When you hear this, it is time to run! But often, smooth salespeople drag the trusting customer in deeper.

Bait and Switch is a tactic used to “up sell”, and such tactics aren’t limited to camera stores.

Years ago, when I was a Deputy D.A. in the Consumer Fraud Division shopping for a mattress in an Ortho Mattress store with my wife, a salesman gave us the same pitch knocking their advertised, “firm” mattress, trying to get us to buy one much more expensive. It was his unlucky day.

And the $1,219 Web site price? With these “better Canon lenses” the price jumped to $2,800″ she told me, angry and close to tears.

Had Marsha researched the advertised lenses online, she would have found them to be praised by camera magazines. She also would have found something which should have frightened her away from Best Price Cameras. Discounted prices of those two lenses in Package #14 — not the camera, just the lenses — would total $1,600!

‘Tough beans!’

When Marsha received the package from Best Price Cameras, it did not contain Canon Stabilized lenses. It did have vastly overpriced, non stabilized Sigma products. She attempted for days to reach the Customer Service Department, and was always placed on hold, finally reaching “Bill Douglas.”

“No, we won’t take the order back without a 20 percent restocking fee, and unless we give you a Return Authorization Number, you can’t return it to us. And I am not going to give you that number. It tough beans, lady,” the creep told Marsha.

That was when she contacted You and the Law, and I next had a chat with the charming Bill Douglas, who refused to provide an address or to talk with me but did agree to discuss this with Marsha … so, I immediately set up a conference call with Marsha on the line.

He again refused to discuss anything, saying, “It is beyond our seven day return policy anyway.” But it was only day 6.

Marsha has filed a Dispute with American Express, and they told her to keep that camera until a valid return mechanism can be worked out. I just hope that Amex will keep their word and not attempt to collect. If they try to press her for money, you’ll be reading about it.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Before buying a camera online, read this story appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Planning a trip out of the country and want to use your cell or smartphone?

Then, today’s story will help you from feeling pickpocketed by your wireless provider, potentially saving from several hundred to several thousand dollars in completely unexpected voice, data and roaming charges, even if you never make a single call or send an e-mail or photo to friends back home.

That’s right. You can be charged hundreds, even thousands of dollars without ever using your cell phone, simply because it was turned on. More on that in a moment.

But if you do intend on using your cell phone and send the occasional e-mail or photo, by following Ken Grunski’s suggestions, your own cell provider won’t slap you with ulcer-producing bills.

As president of San Diego-based Telestial, Inc., Grunski is one of those people who turned an “ah haw” moment into a business which has saved its customers millions of dollars in what would have otherwise been, in many cases, unbelievably high per-minute charges.

That moment came shortly after he had just returned home from an overseas trip and opened his T-Mobile cell phone bill.

“It was just a brief call to California from Tanzania using my T-Mobile phone. I was charged almost $4.00 per minute. At first I thought it was a mistake, but it was no mistake. When I asked friends who lived there what they pay for a call to the U.S., I had to reach for the Rolaids. It was just a few cents a minute.”

“It was an example of cell providers taking advantage of customers with exorbitant overseas roaming charges. But then the light went on: Why not make foreign SIM cards available in the USA, giving travelers a real cell number for that country and paying inexpensive local rates? That’s what Telestial does.”

More to worry about than expensive calls

“It’s bad enough getting soaked, on average, two dollars a minute to make or receive calls when abroad. But what about data use? At home, data plans are very inexpensive, with some carriers offering virtually unlimited use. We can e-mail, send texts, photos, watch streaming video, use GPS, Facebook and access over 200,000 apps inexpensively.”

“But your data plan rates do not apply when leaving the U.S. Less than five pages of text could cost you $10 in most countries. Surf the net for about 10 minutes and you could be out well over $150 easy,” Grunski points out.

“Imagine, getting a bill for several thousand dollars for data use after your European vacation? Just Google ‘data roaming nightmares’ for real- life examples. We are accustomed to data being part of our lives, constantly updating friends on where we are, what we are doing. If you never get motion sickness, I guarantee you’ll have it, while sitting at your kitchen table, looking at that bill, and the scary thing is that you do not even have to use the data portion of your phone to be in trouble,” he warns.

Roaming overseas = running up a huge bill

“Cellphones are constantly looking for a compatible network to latch onto. In the United States, you are still on the same network – AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. – anywhere you go, but not when you travel overseas. If the phone can connect with a network, it will, and you are now in roaming mode, no longer on your own, very inexpensive rate plan.”

“Even simply leaving the phone turned on or using the alarm clock function means that you could easily be running up hundreds of dollars a day in roaming charges. You do not have to answer the phone in order to be hit with roaming charges,” Grunski stressed, adding, “if your phone is set to automatically receive SMS or text messages, you are at risk for an enormous bill.”

Specific advice

“Regardless of which phone you own, to avoid expensive roaming and data charges while overseas, begin by turning both Fetch Data and Data Roaming off. Likewise for Voice Mail Auto Check. Read your local cell provider’s warnings for overseas use of the phone. Be aware that apps, such as stock quotes and weather, will continue to stream even while roaming – they do not know that your data is no longer free.”

Read the phone’s instruction manual and be sure that what you want off is in fact off,” Telestial’s president recommends.

You can use a cell phone overseas inexpensively, not for just staying in touch, but even allowing your friends to follow your journey online, in real time, seeing where you are. It is completely free, incredibly cool, and we’ll tell you how next week.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Before taking your cell and smartphone abroad appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

“We are two U.S. Navy officers at the Naval Weapons Station in Lemoore. We have both been fortunate indeed in being married to the most wonderful women in the world – who are from Japan,” their e-mail began.

“They miss being able to easily listen to radio broadcasts from home. While it was always possible to sit in front of the computer and listen online, that meant that you were stuck in one room.

“Recently, we were in England and purchased Internet radios, allowing Wi-Fi connections to your home Internet and the ability of listening to radio stations from all over the world. When they arrived, the sound was really poor, as if damaged during shipment, and unlistenable. We contacted the seller in London, but they refused to do anything for us.

“They were charged to our American Express credit cards. Is there anything we can do, or are we going to be out close to $400? Also, we know that you occasionally test products and report your findings in You and the Law. In terms of Internet radios on the market, what’s out there that you could recommend? Thanks for the advice, Two Navy Guys.”

Lucky guys indeed

My Navy readers aren’t just lucky in having found wonderful wives, but in their choice of credit cards. American Express is one of the few with “purchase protection.” I checked with them, and was told that, as the radios may have been damaged during shipment to Lemoore from London, they would “buy them back from our cardholder,” up to a maximum of $1,000 per purchase, if a claim was made within 90 days of the purchase.

As it had only been two months, they were fine and have filed claims. We are confident they will obtain refunds and then can buy an Internet Radio which sounds absolutely great. And, yes, they do exist, and we have recently tested several of them. Here are our findings and recommendations. But first, what is Internet Radio?

What is Internet radio?

Today, radio and television stations – over 16,000 – from all over the world “stream” their broadcasts over the net, and anyone with a computer and speakers can access these broadcasts in stunning clarity, completely free. All you have to do is to just sit in front of your computer and you’re there.

But who wants to just sit in front of the computer for hours, listening to radio? I don’t, and now, every morning, as I am shaving, I’m also listening to the news on NPR, Radio France or Radio Sweden, from a tabletop radio in my bathroom that is wirelessly connected to our Wi-Fi. A little music to accompany a shower?How about Classic FM from the UK? It is all cool beyond description, and truly a new era for radio.

“Most people have never heard of Internet Radio,” Brad Pittman, product marketing manager at V-Tech told me. “These radios are ideal for people who have moved throughout their lives, immigrants who want to listen to their hometown radio station, or music lovers who wants to listen to music of a particular type. You go in, pick the type of music of you want, and will have tons of stations to choose from, from every corner of the planet,” he enthusiastically points out.

What to buy?

If you are primarily interested in music and looking for knock-your-socks-off deep bass, then you’ll want a stereo Internet Radio. The best ones we reviewed were the absolutely beautiful Sangean WFR-1 and the V-Tech IS9181. In terms of general listenability between the two, my vote goes to the V-Tech, as I am more interested in news and voice as opposed to music.

While you can adjust “tone” to a certain extent, the Sangean still tends to be a bit bassy – fine for music, but to my ears, not so hot for speech. Yes, you certainly can listen to news on it, but it just seems to sound better with music.

The V-Tech IS9181 is a real gem. Loads of clean sound, and it can be battery operated, which makes it unique. When I tell clients they are listening to jazz from Korea in CD quality, I get a “What? You mean like shortwave?”

“Yes, same idea, only it’s not shortwave, it’s Internet radio,” I explain.

There are a lot of companies who sell these radios, and it’s really important to do your homework online. Read reviews. Only buy if you can get a complete refund. I must stress that.

So, what would I buy? Of the radios I tested, only three: the V-Tech IS9181, the Grace Innovator III or Grace Pandora Internet Radio, or the Livio radios featuring Pandora or NPR. The Grace products remind me of my grandfather’s old Grundig radio, which just sounded good on everything.

We’ll revisit these evolving new consumer products at a later time.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Before you buy an Internet radio appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Lovers of governmental conspiracy theories will enjoy today’s story, as we look at what has been an on-going effort—for at least 10 years — by California and energy utilities to take control of your home’s thermostat and much more.

Only this is no theory. It’s for real, and we’ll tell you about in a moment, but first, picture yourself returning to the produce section at a supermarket the day after you purchased a five-pound bag of potatoes — for $1.79 — instead of the 10 pounds requested.

Today, the price at the same display — the same bags of potatoes — is $8.25. You ask the produce manager, “What’s going on? How can this be?” and her response is, “Well, we just got word that the next crop of potatoes months from now will be more expensive, so we are passing that cost on to you, now.”

That’s what we see with petroleum. Prices can change hourly, even though what is in the service station’s tanks today was paid for months ago, as most suppliers hedge their costs, and buy forward, while happily passing along those future prices to us, today. To most consumers, this practice stinks.

Beginning several years ago — over significant objections — Smart Meters were installed by energy utilities across the country. These devices allow charges to vary by time of day, sending information about a customer’s usage to the utility in real time. Rate plans are offered, so that it is possible to significantly reduce your bill by scheduling certain activities — running the dishwasher, or doing a load of laundry — at hours when prices are lower.

“And Smart Meters were nothing in comparison to what’s happening now,” Chatsworth, California-based Tony Albers, Product Manager at Venstar, Inc. told You and the Law.

Venstar is one of the largest U.S. makers of energy-saving smart thermostats with over 8 million sold in the North American market.

“Dennis, your readers need to be aware that if they are going to replace their home heating and air condition system, and the contractor files a building permit, then a new thermostat will likely be required,” Albers points out, adding, “But not just any thermostat.”

As he explained, “California’s Energy Commission is now requiring that thermostats are able to communicate back to the utility which could have the ability of raising or lowering the temperature setting to reduce the homeowner’s energy use.
You read correctly. Your utility could be able to raise the temperature in summer, or lower it in winter, saving energy, and something more.
However, things go well beyond being able to take over your thermostat. It will be more difficult to anticipate how much our energy bills will run, and we should expect to pay more, as Albers describes:

“Much like airlines which contract for jet fuel months out, locking in the price, utilities do the same thing, buying a year out, a certain amount at a set price. If a heat wave comes through, or winter is abnormally cold they need to purchase more energy on the open market, and must float with the price as it goes up and down.

“Utilities do not want to buy a year out. Their wish — granted by California — is to pass along real time pricing to the homeowner. So, you could be on a good rate plan, but if they are suddenly required to purchase more energy, up goes your bill,” he observes.

“To help the homeowner know consumption and cost, new thermostats must be able to display your current price level. If you are paying a 24 cents per KW and your price spikes to 50 cents, the thermostat can be programed to set itself back, and that’s a very good thing.”

Homeowners are legally able to avoid losing control of their thermostat by purchasing one online or from a home improvement store.

“The ability of a utility to take control of your temperature settings is something that has to enabled by the homeowner. It isn’t automatic. So, merely connecting a new thermostat does not allow the utility any access to it,” Albers underscores.

Three years ago this column reviewed programmable, smart, wifi thermostats produced by Venstar and Honeywell, finding both to be excellent products, and since that time we have realized significant energy savings. Many more are on the market today.

In our experience, having the ability from anywhere to adjust the thermostat has been a great convenience and a conversation piece as well. Do your research, watch user videos, and get ready to lower your energy bill.

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Big Brother wants to control your thermostat appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

If you recently purchased or are close to buying a smart TV and a reason is the ability of Skyping with family and friends on a large screen, then have a bottle of aspirin and blood pressure meds, handy, because by the time you finish reading today’s story, you’ll need both.

“Why?” you’re thinking. The answer was contained in an email from readers who live in Kingsburg.

“Late last year we purchased a 65-inch Samsung Smart TV so we could Skype with family in Sweden and watch Swedish news online. This required the $150 Samsung camera that works only with their TV sets.

“Skyping with the ability of having all five of us together in the living room is really great. We also love the TV’s beautiful pictures, and as a smart TV — which is basically a computer inside of a television — we watch Netflix, Facebook, listen to music on Pandora, and on it goes.

“Or went, I should say, because a few days ago, a message was flashed on our screen stating that on June 2nd Samsung is discontinuing Skype! Now it’s impossible to watch our Swedish news programs because Samsung removed Adobe Flash from the TV! How can they do this? These were the main reasons we bought the TV! Can you please tell us what’s going on, and if we have rights?”

Beginning in 2010, in conjunction with smart TV manufacturers, Microsoft — which owns Skype — brought video calling into living rooms worldwide. Installed as an application, all you needed was either a built-in camera, or to purchase a proprietary camera only usable on that manufacturer’s television.

Skype for smart TV was a huge marketing success, both for personal and business us, enabling life-size video conferencing in multiple locations, completely free. We phoned Best Buy stores in the US and Canada, asking, “How important is Skype for smart TV sales? Paraphrasing, in every instance, we were told:

“It is a wonderful application, and especially for customers with large families and grandchildren far away, Skype was the main reason they purchased a smart TV.”

While admitting that “Skype has delivered a great calling experience in the living room, in partnership with several TV manufacturers,” a Skype spokesperson told us:

“Over the years, the way people use Skype has changed and the majority of people access Skype in their living room from mobile and tablet device. Starting from June 30th  2016, Skype for TV applications will no longer receive software updates.

“Skype is leaving it up to smart TV manufacturers whether or not they decide to remove the app or service from their devices or continue to offer an unsupported version.”

So, here is our translation of what Microsoft is telling the world about its Skype app in your Smart TV:

“It works great, people love it, you paid for it, you went out and bought an expensive camera, but because some people Skype with a tablet or cell phone in their living room, the rest of you are getting burned.”

While not required by Microsoft, Samsung has announced removing Skype from its smart TVs as of June 2nd, 2016. They are the only Smart TV manufacturer we have found that is taking this action.

Recently, Samsung made viewing content that requires Adobe Flash impossible as it was removed, and there are angry posts all over the internet from people who feel cheated.

We spoke with Samsung media relations asking why they are doing this. Will they offer refunds to customers for TV sets or cameras purchased just to use Skype? Why remove Adobe Flash? Are you replacing Skype or Flash with something?

While promised a thorough response to all of our questions, “a Samsung Spokesperson” emailed:

“Our smart TV platform has a variety of apps that allow users to watch and stream content, such as Netflix. We cannot comment on any third party content that users may view on the web browser of their smart TV.”

There’s nothing like a non-answer to warm the heart.

Professor Bryan Hull of Loyola Law School, provided this analysis:

“If Samsung markets these televisions as being compatible with Skype and then terminates the compatibility within an unreasonably short time after the purchase was made, it could be seen as a breach of contract and an unfair business practice. A possible remedy would be for Samsung to provide an alternative video calling app.”

Keep tuned to the Samsung/Skype Class Action Channel. 

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post Buying a smart TV to use Skype? appeared first on Dennis Beaver.

Chances are you’ve never heard of Golden Bright Manufacturing located in Hong Kong. But Palmer Tank & Construction, on South Union Avenue, right here in Bakersfield where I live — that name might ring a bell for anyone in the oil industry.

Palmer Tank is one of the nation’s largest companies who specialize in the fabrication of bolted and welded tanks for bulk storage of drinking, waste and fire protection water. Golden Bright produces and sells toys — radio control toy boats and racing vehicles, some of which would make any overgrown kid drool over.

So, what do they have in common, and more importantly, what connection does any of this have to California lawyers?

The answer to part one of the question is nothing, absolutely nothing. Palmer Tank has never heard of Golden Bright, nor of “Eric Fung,” who claims in a nicely worded e-mail, that Palmer owes his company over $200,000 and needs help of a local lawyer in collecting the money.

The e-mail is written in appropriate business English, and requests a copy of the attorney’s retainer agreement.

When a lawyer or a law firm receives one of these e-mails, they’ve been targeted in a dangerous and seductive scam. A number of San Joaquin Valley attorneys have received the e-mail.

So let’s say the attorney replies. It could lead to the greatest financial mistake in one’s legal career.

Eric Fung wastes no time, and in a highly appreciative tone explains in detail that his company is owed money by Palmer, urging that a conflicts check be conducted, and if none is found, to please represent them.

If further information about the nature of the debt is requested by the attorney, or a desire to speak with Eric, he sends a third e-mail.

This time, the tone is less pleasant, commenting, “Our Board of Directors was discouraged by your earlier e-mail, but I still want to proceed. They (Palmer) informed us payment will be effected no later than (a specific date) and we have instructed them to make payment to our legal representative in California (Your Firm.)”

The attorney writes back, “I would really like to discuss this with you, as I’m a bit confused. Am I to receive payment from your customer, deposit it into my trust account, deduct our fees, and then remit the balance to you? Why can’t they pay you directly?”

Eric — who probably resides, not in Hong Kong, but in Nigeria — sends the following response:

“There is nothing to be confused about. That is exactly what you are to do. It is as simple as that. Let me know as soon as you receive payment from our customer!”

The lawyer replies, “Why can’t the customer pay you directly? I am even more confused than before. Unless we can discuss this, I am afraid you will need to contact some other law firm.”

Finally, the ever charming Eric sends this final e-mail:

“OK then I am fed up. You are not professional at all. How can a lawyer be confused all the time? This is why we decided not to work with you in the first place. I will seek the services of another attorney.”

Lawyers all over the United States have fallen for similar scams, some of which are far more sophisticated, but all of which end this way:

A cashier’s check is indeed received, from a large, well-known bank. It is deposited, and then, after deducting attorney fees, the lawyer immediately wires funds to the client’s account. Days to weeks later, the “cashier’s check” is determined to be fake.

The attorney’s bank will typically have a friendly little chat with their lawyer customer, and in most cases, repayment will be required — legally required.

As you have by this time no doubt guessed, I received Eric’s initial e-mail. But I knew something that he didn’t know.

There is a real Eric Fung, and a real Golden Bright Manufacturing in Hong Kong. As my son resides there, and speaks Cantonese, it was easy to determine that someone is using Mr. Fung’s name.

From the beginning it all had the ring of a scam, one which I was curious to see where it would lead. But there was something else that gave it all away, contained in Eric’s first e-mail.

“We are looking for a firm with jurisdiction within the state of North Dakota to provide legal services as requested.”

Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield and enjoys hearing from his readers. Contact Dennis Beaver.

The post California lawyers target of internet scam appeared first on Dennis Beaver.