FCC investigates Apple, AT&T for Google Voice app rejection - Page 4

No what is sickening is not allowing carrier competition to bring down prices, bring up quality and introduce different use plans for different people's needs.

For instance, my flip Motorola phone cost $30 and I use anywhere from $10 to $15 a month in minutes on average, exact AT&T voice quality (no data obviously). What brought about this marvelous arrangement? Competition!

The government steps in when companies purposely conspire to create a unfair competitive advantage.


The government needs to step into the carrier/phone exclusive deals.

RIM is on nearly all carriers, so should the iPhone.

In the world we live in, political sniping seems to follow us everywhere we go.

It is always the other parties fault no matter what

For the same reason you can choose your own long-distance carrier on your home landline phone even though the local telephone company owns the line. The local company had to open up their network. So, if we believe that was fair, I suppose we should believe that the cell companies should open up their systems, too.

If course, I'm not so sure that things are so much better since we broke up ma Bell. (Did I just write that?)

It is easy to bad mouth ATT, but it is important to look at their contributions to this country for over a century. In 1976, I came to US/Houston, TX from India. I had already been to Europe before. One of the most impressive things about the US was the phone system! Put a dime in pay phone and actually make a local call for as long as I wanted. If the call did not go through, I got the dime back. After I got an apartment, the phone guy came in and hooked up the phone like in 2 days... the whole set-up. It always worked, rain, storms, etc. Voice was clear and touch tone. No rotary wheel to turn. Dial the wrong long distance number? They gave my money back. The service is still reliable. The area I am in gets hit with storms, hurricanes... electrical power goes off, cell phones go dead, but the land line always works.

In India, it used to take over 5 years to get a phone like... and then you had to pay baksheesh too, or else, they lost the application and deposit. Terrible connections and they still do not work well after monsoons, etc. Europe was bad too. Of course, times have changed in EU and the phone system there is now better than ours in many places. Again, a lot of this was tech driven... with EU subsidies.

ATT with Bell Labs did make a lot of contributions to this country... with the transistor, cell phone technology, TDMA/GSM, fiberoptics. Their wired network after deregulation, allowed a lot of companies to free load over their network. Technology can change the dynamics of any industry and certainly changed telecom... and ATT went through changes too.

Got to give them credit for taking the risk with Apple and the iPhone. The bought on the concept sight unseen... especially after the dud Moto iPod phone. They incorporated the Visual Voice Mail even before the iPhone was released. Gave Apple total control. Verizon just thumbed their nose at Apple. Guess what? ATT deserves the rewards and why shouldn't they protect their investment from freeloaders like Google? If Google thinks their GV is the killer app, go peddle that stuff on their Android.

Again, as many have mentioned here, this is a free economy. Google, VZ, etc can peddle their own stuff. There is too much sense of entitlement to freeload these days.

Good morning!!!! AT&T officially said 2 years ago that they will never ever unlock any iPhone you buy from Apple or them in the US, which is locked to their network. Not even after you fulfill your contract. Not even after 2 years and not even when you pay the full price of the iPhone. The said it clear and loud. Why they said it? Because there is no law in the US against it. Yes I agree with you it sucks and the FCC should do something about that just like Europe. However, there is light. Verizon and Sprint settled a lawsuit last year and agreed to officially unlock any phone they sell if the buyer fulfill his contractual agreement (2 years contract). Right now, the same lawsuit is going on against AT&T and T-Mobile and hopefully they will agree to something similar.

My advice to you if you want 3GS is to jailbreak and unlock your iPhone 3G and sell it on ebay. I got $400 for mine when 3GS was released in Jun. Good luck.

But their phones aren't.

How dare they include Apple in this. Apple is the American dream. It is mom Wozniak and pop Jobs. It is America. Anyone who opposes Apple should be dragged out of their beds at night to an Anti-American Practices meeting, interrogated, and interned in camps with other undesirables (people who buy Japanese cars, Sony, Dell, Microsoft instead of Apple).

This is America we don't regulate our free markets otherwise how would you get success stories like Bear Stearns, Washington Mutual, Countrywide, AIG, etc.

Yes, Lkrupp. Its good to see you stand up for us against the evil, socialist government that is looming. If they would just keep their hands off so we all could be forced to work twelve hours a day, six days a week, in the worst of working conditions just like in the good old days we would all be so much happier. Libertarian paradise. Meanwhile we should probably dismantle schools, police forces, libraries, water works, sewer systems, roads etc. They really smack of 'government interference' and 'socialism' of the worst sort.

Hey Einstein! No one said anything was illegal. The FCC is not claiming this is a crisis. This is a regulatory branch of the government doing its job by investigating possible threats to the demand side of the supply-demand relationship of a free market.

right on. Can't recall the name of the article but texting is a scam. The article went on to point out that it costs the carriers NOTHING as it uses down time and the way it's transmitted uses no bandwidth whatsoever.

I'm waiting for the smart phone that plays flash,allows me to watch any videos I want ala ABCs Lost and slingbox. As soon as that shows up, AT&T can have my early termination fee.

Let's see lost episode 2, season 4 free on ABC OR $2.99-$1.99 from iTunes.
Hmmmmmm

anywho. Google how text messages are actually free and how we pay for something that takes up ZERO bandwidth.
someone needs to come up with a iPhone limewire mpeg/avi to iPhone conversion.

Actually, T-Mobile already does unlock. They unlocked my two phones when we were just 8 months into our contract (we were going to Toronto and wanted to put in a Canadian SIM).

I think people have told me that AT&T does unlock other phones - again, not sure if that's a one-time thing or if it's policy. Since I switched, I haven't asked them to unlock any phones yet, but will probably try on my next trip to Toronto.

Wow! I think you have me confused with those who have made this thread about party politics. Somehow, I am not offended by being called an Einstein.

I agree that those in the stix shouldn't pay the same for data if none, or only GPRS is available, but if they can sue, can I sue because I live in a top-100 US city and only get edge when the guy on the other side of the river enjoys 3g?

suing for data coverage differences sadly will not go anywhere, I am reminded of the time not too many years ago when Comcast in a mid sized town added over a dozen new channels (this was a long time ago, channels like espn2, BET, and MSNBC(when MSNBC was a tech channel)) while the rural comcast clients didn't get those channels for 3 years or more while paying the same exact cost for "expanded basic" cable. I don't know of any law suits, but I know the ultimate solution ended up coming with regional standardization of lineup with digital cable.

This investigation and the other investigations into wireless carrier practices are a good thing that will ultimately result in more competition, more consumer choice, lower consumer cost and better service in this industry. The carriers, who are using public airwaves, should be turned into dumb pipes that carry data traffic and keep their hands off the phones and what they are used for. There should be an end to phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts.

There is no reason why you need anything but a data plan for an iPhone. If you want a voice plan, it should be optional, just like it is with your cable company. If not, you should be free to use VOIP services, from third parties. This will also drive SMS pricing to the floor as competition for this service will quickly make apparent just how little cost is involved in providing it.

At this point, there is no difference between these wireless carriers and traditional wired services. Network neutrality should be strictly mandated for all of these services, regardless of the transmission medium. The wireless carriers are not some special case that should be allowed to operate under different rules than other network service providers.

Just because the industry has been able to operate like this in the past is no reason to allow it to continue to in the future. It's time for them to play by the same rules as all other carriers and the benefits will be increased competition, increased access and increased innovation, as well as better pricing for consumers.

The defenders of the status quo (at least some of whom are no doubt wireless company representatives, I mean, does anyone really think they don't have people on these forums trying to frame the debate?) will predict dire consequences for the industry and consumers, but no one should listen to them. Consumers will not be harmed by a leveling of the playing field and the industry will ultimately be the better for it, even if it doesn't go so well for individual companies.

Texting costs nothing as Texts are piggybacked on the phone idly pinging the Towers. That is why Texts have no guarantee of being speedy. What happens is, the phone regularly pings the towers to see which one it is within range of, how strong the signal is and what kind of signal it is, as well as letting the tower know that it (The phone) might need to use some bandwidth. There's about 140 characters wort of data free in that action, and that's where Texts are stored. So sending a text is not only free to the carrier, phones are performing the action virtually all the time.

i agree with you, but what would Apple have to charge for the iPhone if they couldn't have: "phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts."?

Most likely, the same price as they do now, perhaps less if competition in (optional) carrier subsidies drives it lower.

Oh, yes, and I forgot to mention in my previous post that it's time to put an end to the insanity of incompatible wireless technologies. Nothing holds progress in this technology/industry back more than the money wasted on duplicating wireless assets. FCC/Congress should mandate a standard with switchover date -- just as they did with HDTV -- and carriers with the 'winning' technology (most likely GSM) should be forced to share towers with those with the 'losing' technology. Obviously, some time will be required for this switchover, but it should be written into law now so that carriers stop wasting money on incompatible technologies, and share the costs of future wireless technologies. The wireless industry in this country is a huge mess because carriers have used technology as well as contracts to lock customers to their service, and it's time for that mess to be cleaned up too.

I think that the facts are somewhat beside the point on this whole imbroglio.

This is shaping up to be a PR disaster for Apple. They should address it, bring GV back - as many have pointed out, it's not such a big deal to do so, since the web version is a decent enough substitute - and move on.

We are also talking about Google --- richer than God himself --- trying to change the rules on FCC spectrum auction WITHOUT any desire to actually bid to win the spectrum.

We are also talking about Google and Apple that are twice as big as the big bad red Verizon, about 10 times bigger than the average Hollywood studio, about 100 times bigger than the big 4 music label.

We are also talking about Google that owns basically the monopoly position in internet searches --- the biggest license to print money.

You guys got suckered into this garbage by ultra rich silicon valley billionaires who control much larger business empires than the relatively lowly and poorer carriers.

Exactly... I love Apple's products, but their attitude is very poor. Admittedly Microsoft has pulled all kinds of shaddy B.S. over the years (Gates was certainly a dirty weasel, although he has more than made up for it with the Gates Foundation), but I can only IMAGINE if MS pulled this kind of anti-competitive crap now.

the iPhone's smartphone share in the USA is pretty large already --- once they are on Verizon, Sprint, and TMobile, I guarantee you they will absolutely dominant with 2/3+ of smartphone sales.
They will not be able to pull this "app filtering" crap.

With the App store as the only non-circumvention route to application installation, it is completely unacceptable for Apple to deny applications because they compete with similar Apple applications, compete with existing AT&T services, or because AT&T is too ***** cheap to run a proper network capable of handling basic tasks like MMS. You pay $30 a month for "unlimited data" aka 5 GB, and you should be able to do whatever the hell you want to with that data, from DVR/streaming video to tethering to VOIP.

in other words, CARRIERS, GET OUT OF MY PHONE!

Relatively lowly carriers? You mean like this one:

Verizon Communications Inc. (12 months ending 12-31-2008)
Revenue: $97 Billion
Gross Profit: $58 Billion
Employees: 235,000

Google Inc. (12 months ending 12-31-2008)
Revenue: $21 Billion
Gross Profit: $13 Billion
Employees 19,000


And even if Google was 20X bigger than Verizon, the point still stands. The carriers have consistently pushed and lobbied for anti-consumer practices. Everything from colluding to increase text messaging rates, to dictating the phones, software, and hardware features that customers can access and use on their personally-owned hardware. Additionally, they maintained a walled garden than gave them monopoly access to the software platform that stifled innovation and allowed them to extort software developers.

Google on the other hand -- while they indeed are in business to make a profit --- have continued to work towards and lobby for open information, free choice and consumer rights. In the spectrum auction, while of course open access rules would help them assuming they have the applications and services consumers most want, they were the major voice for consumers rights while using devices they own that work on airwaves OWNED by the public. The carriers believe they are the gatekeepers to everything even though they are using spectrum leased to them by the American people. It is OUR RESOURCE, and they will abide by pro-consumer rules if they want to use it.

In this case, Apple is acting just like the carriers. If they are going to be the single point of application entry, It in unacceptable for them to deny access to applications and services that compete with their own, or are otherwise a threat to AT&T's profit.

Minor threadjack...

That AT&T/Bell Labs doesn't even exist anymore. It's all parts of different companies, spun off and/or reacquired and combined with other non-BabyBell acquisitions. It was actually SBC (one of the Baby Bells) that took over the remainders that was AT&T and took the name because of its history.

What was Bell Labs is now mostly parts of the French company Alcatel-Lucent.

The wireless company that partnered with Apple with the iPhone was really Cingular, which was an SBC subsidiary.

So lets not give the new AT&T too much credit for what the old vertically integrated company was able to accomplish (through sheer monopoly power). You may not remember, but it was that old monopoly that spawned the phrase: "We're the phone company. We don't care. We don't have to." Lest we remember them too fondly.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled intarwebz forum flamethrowing...

I have a GV number and don't see how it takes money away from ATT - i like that one number will ring where I specify it but for long distance I used my phone minutes or icall (which makes free us calls via their app) and for international I use skype which is still in the app store. I suspect that this has something to do with Google v Apple but what is hard to see. Or it could be as something as an over zealous Apple employee pulling the plug for some reason.

By same price, I hope you meant the $599 and $699 unlocked prices. Otherwise, your comment is nuts.

As for government mandated standards, yes, most of the time they yield consumer benefits in the near term. But the flip side is that standards can also retard innovation and progress. In other words, if all carriers are forced to use one standard wireless technology (such as GSM), why would any carrier want to innovate and make a better one? Once you declare this portion of the business as a standard, you are forcing the carriers to compete in other ways, or you're leading them all into one big monopoly. So each industry/market should be carefully evaluated on its own merits before declaring anything standard. And btw, the government (US or even EU) doesn't have a good track record at doing this kind of stuff.

Both AT&T and T-Mobile do unlock the phones they sell you after certain period of time. However, there is no written policy that they will. They can, just like AT&T is doing with the iPhone, say we are not going to unlock your phone. What the lawsuit want is a written policy to force them to unlock their phones.

All I know is I get no 3G service in my small 150k person town

Yeah, but... "That's usually the problem with government intervention; it often has unpredictable and unintended outcomes."

That's not a theory. That's fact.

Put up your own tower and lease it back if you can.

Very soon Wi-Max will be rolling out to many of the larger cities. Everyone remember what Wi-Max is, right? Everyone remember that Apple has been hiring Wi-Max experts? What do you suppose happens when you combine Apple and Wi-Max? (and don't say "AppleMax", "iMax", etc.)

At the risk of repeating myself.... at the risk of repeating myself...

Wi-Max rollout will address some of the Google Voice users concerns, after all Google is only one of the large companies who have poured money into Clearwire/Sprint.

Here are two rather illuminating articles:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10300017-94.html

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/01/l...-2009-rollout/

And another note of interest:

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...ext_month.html

(Full disclosure: I am a CLWR and AAPL investor)

Hey in my smudge size town get 3g bfe on weekends I get
1.4, Sunday mornings get2.4 never without 3g and the local
store 2 miles from me treats me nice
I guess being in a small town helps me so
I have no reason to switch unless another carrier
could be substatially cheaper WITH MY IPHONE
I'm not giving up my iPhone
I love AT&T

You are one of the lucky ones, Nofeer. A relative of mine is buying an iPhone and has had major problems with at&t just GETTING a phone, much less using one! \

I'm getting sick of AT&T dictating stuff. Not being able to call on skype over 3G is annoying enough. Even more annoying is that I live in Australia so why is some stupid lame communications company in a different country dictating my iPhone experience!!! Sooo frustrating.

I live in Australia too, and we can't even get Google Voice, it's time for the UN to step in and force these companies to make it available to everyone everywhere.*



*Disclaimer most of or all of the above post may contain sarcasm and thus not reflect the true views of the poster

No, I mean the same price they are now. Anyone who reads these forums regularly has seen comments from iPhone users in markets where there is competition -- i.e., no exclusive deal -- who are getting iPhones for the same or lower cost -- including $0 in one market, if I recall correctly -- as US users on AT&T. The idea that competition will result in higher prices for consumers is what is nuts.


The internet has standards, and a well established standards process, and it doesn't seem to have retarded innovation. And, yes, that's exactly the point, force them to compete in other ways: on price, on service, etc. The government track record of regulating industries is just fine. What doesn't have a good track record is lack of competition and deregulation, which often fails spectacularly or leads to corporate abuses.

I fully understand that the wireless carries don't want to have to really compete against each other. I'm sure they are very happy with and will fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo, but allowing them to do so goes against the public interest and causes continual harm to consumers. I welcome forceful government intervention in this market and we will all benefit in the long-term from it. The idea that government is not a good regulator and that government intervention typically causes more harm than good is a pernicious fiction perpetrated by people who don't believe in, or don't want, government acting for the public good.

I know. I think we should threaten nuclear action against AT&T or capture one of them hostage and torture them.

Maybe we should start with sanctions, no McDonalds for lunch today, I'm off to the pie shop.

Be a dweeb somewhere else and stop having a conversation with yourself.

I'll chalk this up to sarcasm attempting to be serious and mocking the entire thread.

None of this thread is of any value as we have zero input on contracts.

Wouldn't surprise me if the big telcos get together on this and use it to get a national franchise law passed. Bush tried to have it passed years ago but all the tiny towns fought it. It would give the telcos permission to build infrastructure anywhere without going through a local government which usually makes them waste money building a yarn museum as well

yes and no. they were given the exclusive rights to the iphone and so long as they have that right they won't give anyone the legit unlock code.

once they don't have that exclusive right they can't stop the unlocking so long as you have fulfilled your contract obligation. I dare say that it will be Apple you'd get the code from. but ATT won't be able to stop it. and even if they try, they will be hit with a ton of lawsuits from folks that either finished or paid to break a contract.

you are however 100% correct that in the US simlocking is totally allowed and there is no master law that says a carrier has to give you the unlock code after X time. so perhaps the solution is to fight that law. get it forced for all devices to be open to all carriers that can handle the technology. in other words, Apple has a GSM phone so any company that can service GSM can have the iphone. so ATT and T-Mobile both can have it. they can do subsidies if they want or you can buy it full price and come and go as you please. if Verizon or Sprint goes GSM they can have it also.