BusinessWeek Logo

Apple, Google and AT&T Letters to FCC: The Reactions, And Why Google's Letter Is Redacted

Posted by: Arik Hesseldahl on August 21, 2009

The first rapid-response reaction to the replies to the FCC by Apple, Google and AT&T just hit my in-box. It’s from Ben Scott, policy director at FreePress:

“Today marks an important step forward for backers of the open Internet. The FCC’s inquiry into Google Voice has ripped back the curtain on the wireless market and revealed AT&T’s secret veto power over applications on the iPhone that offer consumers voice services over the Internet. Google Voice may not have been caught up in this dragnet, but it appears the Skype application was not so fortunate. AT&T’s letter suggests they may reconsider permitting the Skype application in the face of this scrutiny. But the potential chilling effect of AT&T’s gatekeeper power is critical reminder of why the FCC must protect consumers.

“We applaud the FCC for this timely intervention. AT&T has been caught with its hand in the Apple jar. This inquiry has exposed the central issue of who controls the mobile Internet. It’s time for the FCC to move quickly to pass new rules to prohibit exclusive contracts for devices and violations of Network Neutrality.”

FreePress points out that having previously saying it does not manage or approve iPhone apps made available on the App store, AT&T’s letter effectively acknowledges that when it comes to VOIP apps, the opposite appears to be true: The letter says that Apple and AT&T agreed that Apple would not take “affirmative steps to enable an iPhone to use AT&T’s wireless service for making VOIP calls — including 2G, 3G and notably Wi-Fi, without first obtaining AT&T’s permission. Apple’s letter verifies the same point.

However, AT&T’s letter also says that it’s not clear from its analysis of Google Voice that it is in fact a VOIP service in the first place: “Based on AT&T’s review of the information available on the Google Voice website, however, it is our understanding that Google Voice is not a Voice over Internet Protocol service that enables a user to send or receive voice calls in IP format from a wireless handset… Rather Google Voice appears to be an umbrella term used to describe a collection of different services that, in the mobile wireless context, Google provides through a browser-based application available on any web-enabled handset…”

AT&T goes on to hint as to what’s contained in Google’s redacted answer to question 2: “AT&T expects that Google will provide a complete description of Google Voice in response to the letter it received from the Commission and we look forward to learning more about Google Voice based on that response – in particular, Google’s position on the regulatory classification of Google Voice and the intercarrier compensation applicable to calls made using the Google Voice platform.”

Now we have a hint as to why Google kept its answer to that question secret.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.businessweek.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/

Reader Comments

Bud Man

August 22, 2009 10:38 AM

I called my own post on this "Apple to FCC: Drop Dead". Apple claims that it "didn't approve" Google's app; then waht about the three Google Voice apps they PULLED at the same time the rejection - sorry, not-yet-approval - of Google Voice was announced? What about the customers and developers hurt by this? The tech press doesn't seem to care, but this is the real soft underbelly of Apple's answer.

Keifer 98

August 23, 2009 02:38 PM

I am a sales rep, and was told that we needed to lead all customers to an I phone when they come to the store. I love working for ATT but I do see that we are forcing customers to products they may not want. If I do not lead the customer into the I phone it is possible for me to get written up. Recently I attended training and they told us not to mention anything about the new Blackberry applications on the BlackBerry store. I use both phones and they are different but both great products. I just don’t think it is ethical what they are asking me to do. I am reconsidering my employment with the company at this time.

Hardmanb

August 24, 2009 10:29 PM

Keifer, your experience has not been mine. I have AT&T Cellular family plans with children and even in-laws (and phones) changing regularly. Also, I have AT&T U-Verse, and have had problems and changes necessitating frequent visits to my local, but large AT&T store. No iPhones, and I am often in the AT&T store, as it is tyawo doors from my business...and all the employees know me by name and face.

I've never been steered to an Iphone, but have often been steered to other AT&T phones. Indeed, the iPhones are in a row at one side of the front of the store...and all employees and service counters at the back. When I ask about iPhones, the staff doesn't seem to know or care much about them, and usually can't answer my questions. From my perspective, the AT&T stores are steering AWAY from the iPhones.

Hardmanb

August 24, 2009 10:29 PM

Keifer, your experience has not been mine. I have AT&T Cellular family plans with children and even in-laws (and phones) changing regularly. Also, I have AT&T U-Verse, and have had problems and changes necessitating frequent visits to my local, but large AT&T store. No iPhones, and I am often in the AT&T store, as it is tyawo doors from my business...and all the employees know me by name and face.

I've never been steered to an Iphone, but have often been steered to other AT&T phones. Indeed, the iPhones are in a row at one side of the front of the store...and all employees and service counters at the back. When I ask about iPhones, the staff doesn't seem to know or care much about them, and usually can't answer my questions. From my perspective, the AT&T stores are steering AWAY from the iPhones.

Daniel

August 28, 2009 04:20 PM

I get why Apple wouldn't want to approve this app, but I don't think they have a choice. In fact, Google has already confirmed if the app is rejected they will simply make a web page that does exactly the same thing (confirmed at http://www.newsy.com/videos/defending_the_app_store). So what's the point in Apple's antagonism?

ed hardy

March 16, 2010 04:51 AM

ed hardy ed hardy
ed hardy clothing ed hardy clothing
ed hardy shop ed hardy shop
cheap ed hardy cheap ed hardy
ed hardy uk ed hardy uk
ed hardy sale ed hardy sale
ed hardy clothes ed hardy clothes
ed hardy outlet ed hardy outlet
Abercrombie And Fitch Abercrombie And Fitch
Abercrombie Abercrombie
Abercrombie Clothing Abercrombie Clothing
Abercrombie UK Abercrombie UK
Abercrombie London Abercrombie London
Abercrombie Fitch Abercrombie Fitch
Abercrombie Outlet Abercrombie Outlet
tiffany tiffany
tiffany jewellery tiffany jewellery
tiffany jewelry tiffany jewelry
tiffany co jewelry tiffany co jewelry
tiffany co tiffany co
tiffany and co tiffany and co
tiffany silver jewelry tiffany silver jewelry
tiffany jewelry sale tiffany jewelry sale
tiffany uk tiffany uk
uk tiffany jewellery uk tiffany jewellery
tiffany jewellery london tiffany jewellery london
Abercrombie And Fitch Abercrombie And Fitch
Abercrombie Abercrombie
Abercrombie Clothing Abercrombie Clothing
Abercrombie UK Abercrombie UK
Abercrombie London Abercrombie London
Abercrombie Fitch Abercrombie Fitch
Abercrombie Outlet Abercrombie Outlet
nest match nest match

K.

March 23, 2010 11:17 AM

lovers

April 13, 2010 07:48 AM

Post a comment

 

About

A blog on the daily doings of Apple and the many companies in its orbit, with insight and analysis by two longtime Apple-watchers BusinessWeek Senior Writer Peter Burrows and BusinessWeek.com Senior Technology Writer Arik Hesseldahl.

RSS Feed: Byte of the Apple

Leave us a voice message. Learn more.

BW Mall - Sponsored Links

Buy a link now!