If you spend a lot of time using your iPhone in an area with no Wi-Fi, then you can go through a lot of data. Unlimited data used to be an option with some carriers, but then it went away. Now, it is back again. This week, Verizon announced a new unlimited data plan, and AT&T’s new unlimited data plan starts today. The plans are not cheap, but may be worth it if you and/or your family use lots of data. Jerry Hildenbrand of iMore compares the unlimited data plans offered by AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon, and concludes that T-Mobile and Verizon offer the best deals. But of course if a certain carrier provides better coverage in the areas that matter the most to you, coverage may be more important than the cheapest plan. And now, the news of note from the past week:
- In an article for Lawyerist.com, Minnesota attorney Eric Cooperstein discusses using an iPad and Apple Pencil to go paperless in your law practice. He uses his Apple Pencil in many of the same ways that I use mine.
- Anna Massoglia wrote an interesting article for Lawyerist.com about the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision to live stream the hearing on President Trump’s Muslum Ban order. An amazing 136,000 people listened live, which was up slightly from the previous live stream which had 50 listeners. On several occasions, I’ve watched a live video feed of arguments before the Louisiana Supreme Court, and it is nice to be able to monitor what is going on without having to be there — and my office is just a few blocks away from the French Quarter where the Louisiana Supreme Court is located. Live streaming makes it possible to watch or listen from anywhere. I hope that at some point soon the U.S. Supreme Court switches gears and allows live streaming.
- TechnoLawyer got feedback from a number of legal tech folks about Legaltech 2017, which recently took place in New York. Participants include Ian O’Flaherty (developer of TrialPad) and Brett Burney (publisher of Apps In Law).
- Sebastian Anthony of Ars Technica reports that, according to estimates by Gartner, 99.6% of all new smartphones run either iOS or Android.
- Greg Barbosa of 9to5Mac reviews the ExoLens PRO, a high-quality $199.95 wide-angle lens for the iPhone.
- Cyrus Farivar of Ars Technica explores what could happen if you refuse to unlock your phone at the U.S. border.
- Christopher Mele of the New York Times reports that airlines are phasing out screens because everyone uses a smartphone or tablet anyway.
- David Pogue of Yahoo reviews six mesh Wi-Fi systems that help to ensure that you have no Wi-Fi dead spots in your home.
- David Phelan of The Independent interviewed Apple CEO Tim Cook during his recent visit to the UK.
- And finally, Apple will soon launch its first two “TV shows” (if that is even the right phrase to use) which will be available exclusively on Apple Music. One is a reality show called Planet of the Apps — which doesn’t appeal to me because reality shows don’t appeal to me. But the other one is Carpool Karaoke: The Series, and it looks like a lot of fun. Here is the trailer for that one:
Jeff – Muslim Ban order? I thought the executive order was limited to temporarily delaying the immigration of people from 7 specific countries and not directed to all people of any specific religion. Your characterization of the order is broad, sloppy, non-lawyerly, and reveals a political bias.
President Trump himself called it a “Muslim ban” so I don’t think it is really inaccurate to use his own terminology. Here is what the Ninth Circuit said in its ruling: “The States argue that the Executive Order violates the Establishment and Equal Protection Clauses because it was intended to disfavor Muslims. In support of this argument, the States have offered evidence of numerous statements by the President about his intent to implement a ‘Muslim ban’ as well as evidence they claim suggests that the Executive Order was intended to be that ban, including sections 5(b) and 5(e) of the Order. It is well established that evidence of purpose beyond the face of the challenged law may be considered in evaluating Establishment and Equal Protection Clause claims.” Washington v. Trump, 17-35105, 2017 WL 526497, at *10 (9th Cir. Feb. 9, 2017)
You are correct that I think that the ban was unfair, so I will admit to having a bias against it. But I don’t see how you can say it is “broad, sloppy, non-lawyerly” to use that phrase considering that lawyers used that term in the Washington v. Trump briefing and the Ninth Circuit itself used the term in its decision.
Of course, it was the technology angle that caught my attention when I wrote this post. Having that many people live stream an appellate hearing was amazing, and I think it is great that this technology gives so many folks the power to experience court hearings. Even if you and I disagree on the merits of the executive order, hopefully we can both agree that the live streaming was interesting from the standpoint of technology and open courts.
-Jeff
I will concur with you that the technology is cool and the number of people streaming is unbelievable. And I know that is why you posted it. 🙂