AT&T, Apple and Google respond to the FCC over Google Voice and the iPhone App Store
By Nilay Patel 
posted Aug 21st 2009 4:59PM
posted Aug 21st 2009 4:59PM
Update: And here come Apple and Google's responses as well! We're digesting everything as fast as we can, we're going to do this semi-liveblog style after the break, so grab a frosty and dive in.
Update 2: Okay, so we've read through all three filings and broken them down after the break. Our main takeaway? Apple's being pretty hypocritical by claiming on the one hand that the iPhone is at the forefront of a mobile revolution and then saying iPhone users can't figure out how Google Voice is different than the iPhone's built-in functionality on the other. Either your customers are paradigm-busting visionaries or they're not very smart at all, Apple -- you have to pick one. As for AT&T, well, it just seems like it's worried about its network above all else, and while we think it's ridiculous that it enforces the VoIP and SlingPlayer ban on the iPhone and not, say, Windows Mobile devices, we can see why the carrier would push those contract provisions hard. In the end, we're just hoping the FCC forces everyone involved to be more open and transparent about what they're doing and the deals they're making -- Apple's not necessarily exaggerating when it says these are entirely new problems, and whatever happens next will set a precedent for a long time to come.
Apple: (view the response)
- Says it has not rejected the Google Voice application and "continues to study it."
- Apple's concerned Google Voice alters "the iPhone's distinctive user experience" and "disables Apple's Visual Voicemail."
- "The iPhone user's entire Contacts database is transferred to Google's servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways." [Doesn't Mac OS X do this when it syncs Address Book to Google? What's the issue? -- ed.]
- GV Mobile, GVDialer, and VoiceCentral all have the same issues.
- Says it's "covering new ground and doing things that had never been done before," and that "many of the issues we face are difficult and new."
- Apple did not consult with AT&T about whether to approve Google Voice, and Apple alone makes the final decision on whether or not to approve iPhone apps, although part of the AT&T / Apple contract forbids Apple from approving VoIP apps that run on the cell network.
- "Most of the review process is consumed with quality issues and software bugs."
- SlingPlayer Mobile was "initially rejected because redirecting a TV signal to an iPhone using AT&T's cellular network is prohibited by AT&T's customer Terms of Service." [That's pretty much the opposite of what AT&T promised us. -- ed.]
- There are more than 40 full-time trained iPhone app reviewers, and at least two different reviewers go over each app. There's also an App Store Executive Review Board that meets weekly to determine procedures and sets policy for the review process, and also reviews apps that are escalated to the board because they "raise new or complex issues." [Hello, Phil Schiller!]
- Apple gets 8,500 new apps and updates a week, and it claims only 20 percent are not approved as originally submitted.
- AT&T had no role in Apple's consideration of Google Voice or related applications.
- AT&T has had technical discussions with Apple about the impact of certain types of applications on its network -- it was worried about streaming audio apps like Pandora and video apps like MobiTV's Final Four app. Apple changed how audio streaming worked to enable Pandora, but the video feature was removed from the Final Four app.
- AT&T and Apple also discuss whether certain types of apps are consistent with the Apple / AT&T agreement and AT&T's general wireless terms of service.
- The Apple / AT&T deal prohibits apps that allow VoIP calls on AT&T's network, but AT&T plans to "take a fresh look" at authorizing VoIP apps that run on 3G.
- The iPhone receives the largest subsidy AT&T has ever provided on a wireless handset.
- AT&T prohibits television redirection like SlingPlayer Mobile to "safeguard service quality" because "video apps typically do not make any attempt to minimize the frame rate of the content." [Again, that explains SlingPlayer Mobile's rejection, but it's a big change from what AT&T's told us in the past. -- ed.]
- There have been three cases where AT&T has discovered an app it was worried about and gone to Apple: twice Apple sent AT&T directly to the developers, and the third time Apple dealt with the matter itself. All three cases seem pretty benign.
- AT&T has developed several apps for the iPhone, including a "restroom finder" called Have2P.
- Well, this is interesting: Google's response to "What reasons were given for rejecting Google Voice?" is completely redacted. Considering Apple openly offered its version of the story, you have to wonder what's going on here.
- Google Voice is still available to iPhone users from the web, but Google knows the best experience is via the app.
- Google doesn't "screen or reject" Android Market apps "on the basis of content or functionality." There's an automated testing system in place.
- And that's seriously it -- Google didn't have much to say. Seeing as it's essentially the wronged party in all of this, that makes sense, but you'd think it would push its case a little harder given the singular opportunity here.
So, which one of the two giants is lying?
Apple.
Apple, does not give a flying fish about how much data its phone uses, they only care about selling phones and making the user experience as enjoyable as possible...
AT&T cant have everyone mooching free from Google...
Apple would make an app that uses 10GB a day if they wanted... AT&T network is SHITE!!!!
Hey that SAF that you pay is not to upgrade the networks, but to fill up the gas tank in those Ferraris and Bentlys of Rogers and AT&T...
My vote is still for AT&T lying over here.
Apple had nothing to lose/gain with Google Voice's rejection, but GV was a significant threat to AT&Ts cash cow of those insanely overpriced SMS plans and also all the minutes consumed during the use of Visual Voicemail.
Also, it might be worth noting over here that the GV app was personally given the green signal by Phil Schiller himself 3 months before it was even sent in formally for approval, which would make sense because Google declared that GV for iPhone is coming soon (a company of this reputation wouldn't just say such things if they're not very positive about it). Then all of a sudden, it gets rejected.
I find it hard to believe that Apple rejected tethering apps unless AT&T asked them to do so.
Apple, in this case, hasn't lied. They rejected the app, and never pointed the finger at anyone. They said the GV apps duplicated functionality, and that was the cause for the rejection. It's a BS policy, but that's their policy, and they issued the rejection.
No, they may have a contract with AT&T that says what sorts of app AT&T would not like to have in the store, but obviously the decision comes down to Apple.
It's deffinitely AT&T's fault. It's a piece of shit company. When I was with them, they've been screwing my billing on a regular basis.
I hate AT&T. Can't wait for the iPhone become non-exclusive and watch ATT sink. Why does Apple even support this exclusivity? They'd sell more phones if just any operator could buy them.
Oh that's easy...
Apple "Says it has not rejected the Google Voice application and "continues to study it."
So they've had it and it was their decision to use it, except...
"Apple's concerned Google Voice alters "the iPhone's distinctive user experience" and "disables Apple's Visual Voicemail.""
It has a competing feature so we can't allow it just like some of the other competing apps.
"# Says its "covering new ground and doing things that had never been done before," and that "many of the issues we face are difficult and new.""
Bullshit. Mobile apps have been available on other platforms for years. What new ground is Apple covering here?
Front up, soldiers: It was Apple and Apple alone.
Wow, screw Apple.
That's it: they rejected it because it has a better solution than visual voicemail. The iPhone's visual voicemail can't do voice transcription, which is actually a much better feature that the weaksauce solution that Apple offers. I bet Steve Jobs personally screwed this up; it totally reeks of a spoiled brat CEO throwing a tantrum.
So the moral of the story is Apple will reject your app if you do something better than they do.
Well Apple's response is so far full of the most obvious...stretches of the truth.
Claiming that running Google Voice would "disable" the visual voicemail based on the fact that if you're running the google voice app you woud be using google voice's voicemail system is pretty ridiculous.
"So, which one of the two giants is lying?"
Google obviously isn't lying.
AT&T isn't lying.
Apple just flat out admitted it.
Everything else is just Apple fanboys running around screaming with their hands over their ears.
Fuck Apple.
The flood of amazing Android phones coming out over the next year is looking better and better every day.
I find it amazing that even though the article clearly states (from both AT&T and Apple) that AT&T had no voice in the apps rejection into the App Store, that people are still crying and blaming AT&T.
Stop victimizing Apple, you think they give a shit about their customers any more than AT&T?
Even if you want to point the finger and some how blame AT&T, at the end of the day Apple is the one allowing all this to happen, because after all the App Store is owned by Apple and not AT&T. They are just as guilty (if not even more so) of being greedy, money hungry whores for inking a deal that gives AT&T any power at the app approval process at all.
All these letters are evidence of great sidestepping and doublespeak.
AT&T sure skirted the issue on Page 15 of their response as to apps being rejected from the app store but available on other handsets. It seems fairly evident that this question was intended to ask why AT&T why they allow Sling on WinMo, Blackberry, and Symbian handsets, but AT&T really really took all efforts never to mention Sling in their entire response. In my mind, this was a bad move on the FCC's point not to ask the question more directly as it might have forced the issue of explaining why Apple is responsible for enforcing the ToS.
Apple does not do a good job of explaining why they choose to play policeman for AT&T's ToS, particularly given that the iPhone is available worldwide.
But I do believe this spat is mostly between Google and Apple and Apple is being very unreasonable. If they truly believed that an app presenting its own dialer and sms interface was grounds for rejection, there would be quite a few apps rejected for these same reasons. So Google may be eager to ride the media train out here to see if they can get away with something they aren't supposed to -- if so, then Google isn't exactly being honest either.
I don't know if any one of you noticed, but maybe the first 1 or 2 pages of Apple's response was simply an Advertisement for the iPhone. As I kept reading, I asked myself "Is this actually the response? Or simply the planning script for their new commercial?"
tl;dr
LOL WAIT... In one sentence Apple says there is contractual limitations to limiting VOIP to wifi only. Then when asked if GV is VOIP, they say they don't know. Yet, this ONE & ONLY LEGAL basis for them to actually reject GV, they didn't even investigate it? BS.
AT&T and Apple's responses sure seem to have been coordinated.
On the flip side, I think they're being pretty honest in that GV is almost like a whole new front end for voice & sms on the iphone (and the web version is not), and that's truthfully what they don't like about it.
You want GV apps to be web-based so users have a choice eh, Apple? Well if a user installs the app on their phone, doesn't that mean they made the choice that they want it?
Screw you Apple. Get your crappy products out of my life. I'm sick of being restricted on my iphone and can't wait until my contract is up.
Get your lies out of here.
obviously Apple... but wondering, why google is keeping Apple's reply as confidential!!!!
Does it really matter who's lying?
Oh how I long for the days of the Internet Bubble when the ideas were fresh and the big corporations were scrambling to figure out how they could be an Internet company. The little guys were shaking things up and providing Internet Service when the cable cos and telcos wouldn't touch it. In those days the big boys couldn't say to their managements that the reason they hadn't made their products more consumer friendly yet is that they wanted "to get it right". Nice stall. Gas up the Range Rover and head out on Thurs for a long weekend.
Thanks FCC.
Wow, better than Dallas!
Apple, you are screwed!! You have been thrown under the BUS!
I know, right? With only 40 people approving apps, then they are going to get under the bus alright.
AT&T You lying rotten gangster monopolizing SOB's!!!!!
+1
It will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out.....
Wow I got a +1 !!!
sniff, this is a special moment...
I'd like to thank the academy, Engadget, My Voice coach! that guy who gave me the +1...
One thing is that AT&T screw you Americans. But when we in Europe (and I suppose other carriers in the US) got carriers who couldn't care less if we tether 20 GB from our iPhone every month, it shouldn't touch everybody - thought the regional stores helped in that matter? But no.. SlingPlayer is pretty much useless with only WiFi..
lol at meat juice.
see what happens when you make a sensible comment and not troll around for once?
say it with me people, AT$T sucks.
,-._
,--/___ `.
| `--`.___
| o `I-.__
| o |---
My god do you look like a pathetic fanboy.
Apple just ADMITTED to be one responsible. They even outlined in detail the bullshit justification for doing so.
And yet the fanboys are still trying to pretend their beloved Apple had nothing to so with it.
Sucks to be you iPhone fanboys. Google Voice is incredible and life changing.
Enjoy your farts apps.
Now you're being just as bad as he is. I had no idea that without google voice, all there was to use was fart apps. Thanks, hypocritical fanboy.
I doubt it. The gv rejection has ATT's paws all over it. ME thinks bullshit on this one.
Think about this now. GV calls your phone, thus you're using minutes. What the hell would AT&T care if a program facilitates your using of cell minutes. I was an Apple fanboi but this of course is Apple. They wan't nothing at all to do with a program that some old lady can download and then be calling Apple every 5 minutes because she can't understand why she can't call out. We collectively have to understand the iPhone is not a computer from Apple. It is not an open experience. It's a smart phone with a proprietary OS. They don't want you hacking and don't want you using apps that they have already built into their OS.
misc, you're an idiot.
misc, GV uses DATA to call, not voice...
No $hit....It was only the Apple Zealots who thought Apple could do no wrong that were blaming AT&T. This was an Apple decision from top to bottom.
Honestly, after looking at what the GV app for android does. I can see why Apple in their control freak ways rejected the app. It "duplicates features" with a dirty third party app. The app exists on blackberry devices on the AT&T network. So its likely AT&T did not kill this app. The blame is falling on Apple.
AT&T has no control over BlackBerry apps. I'm sure it does however have influence with Apple.
So that's read as "We may have screwed people before, but this it it wasn't us this time, we swear."
Google voice suck anyway
you sir, have no brain
either that or you're just jealous you didn't get an invite. go ahead... take your time on this one
Agreed, It sucks.
Yeah, what a pathetic app, providing awesome text messaging, voicemail transcriptions, number screening and other handy features. Damn Google and their free applications.
No, it does not suck, but the way I want to use it, it's worthless until I can port my own number to it. Once that is a go, I'm all in baby.
You know what sucks? Not being able to use a service on MY phone that I paid and continue to pay for because my network provider is too concerned that I won't use my minutes or that I'll clog the wireless pipes. We all pay a lot to use our iPhones, and we get this kind of BS and network problems instead. The point may not be whether or not GV sucks (but let me tell you, it doesn't). The point of the matter is that AT&T probably has to approve any and all applications that rely on an internet connection, regardless of what they're telling the FCC. They have this measure of control over Apple and they use it to rip us off.
I wish Google had bought up all of the old analog towers. I'd rather use a full-fledged Google phone service than have to deal with all this crap going on.
Are you serious? Google voice enabled me to have free local toll call, free to call Canada, free to make SMS, easy to block people from calling me, have you even use it?
So besides trolling, what is it that you don't like about:
FREE UNLIMITED OUTGOING CALLS? (if you use it with Sprints Pick 3/5, or TMo's Fave 5's)?
Or is it the voicemail transcriptions you object to?
Perhaps free SMS doesnt sit well with you?
Could it be the one phone number you can always have for the rest of your life that doesn't sit well with you?
How about Free calls to Canada, and cheap international calling that puts your local service providers, and even land lines to shame?
There are lots of other features Im not even mentioning, but seriously, either you're a jealous iPhone using iDiots, or your just another troll.
yeah they did
Well it's clearly to do with them. But the reason they are denying this as Apple must have signed something in the beginning that won't allow them to approve such type of software, meaning it is AT&T, but not just saying ohai, we don't want google voice, instead they probably said it before the apps store even launched that they won't want anything of that sort to be approved.