Google to join Apple, AT&T in FCC hot seat
While Apple and AT&T have long been seen as the suspects in a Federal Communications Probe into the blocking of Google Voice from the App Store, Google, rather than playing the role of victim, may also be under fire after each company files comments Friday.
A new report from USA Today states that Apple, AT&T and Google are all soon expected to explain to the FCC their role in the ongoing Google Voice saga. The government began looking into the matter after an application that accessed Google's free telephony service was blocked from use on the iPhone. But the report also notes that Google has engaged in similar practices with its Android mobile phone platform, allegedly preventing a full-featured Skype application, for Internet-based phone calls.
"Android users get Skype Lite, a watered-down version of the original that routes calls over traditional phone networks ? not the Internet," the report states. "As a result, long-distance calls are still cheap or free, but cellphone minutes are gobbled up every time a Skype Lite call is made."
By comparison, Apple and AT&T allow a Skype application on the iPhone App Store. However, that program only allows calling via Wi-Fi, and 3G access for phone calls is blocked.
"Most 3G networks should support Skype presence and chat," Skype's official iPhone Web site states. "However, Skype calling is not possible via the iPhone. Please note that data usage costs apply for using Skype over 3G mobile networks, so we recommend an unlimited data plan."
Skype told USA Today that Android does not support a full-featured version of Skype. And Google admitted it blocks VOIP connections at the request of "individual operators," without naming T-Mobile, the only U.S. carrier for Android at the moment. However, a T-Mobile representative denied that the company has requested Google to block Skype. Like Apple, Google must describe its process for reviewing and approving applications for the FCC. Those filings are expected Friday.
Google plans to offer a full-featured, browser-based version of its Google Voice application on the iPhone in the near future. And the Android maker claims the "latest version" of its mobile operating system would support VOIP, but no applications have been submitted.
A new report from USA Today states that Apple, AT&T and Google are all soon expected to explain to the FCC their role in the ongoing Google Voice saga. The government began looking into the matter after an application that accessed Google's free telephony service was blocked from use on the iPhone. But the report also notes that Google has engaged in similar practices with its Android mobile phone platform, allegedly preventing a full-featured Skype application, for Internet-based phone calls.
"Android users get Skype Lite, a watered-down version of the original that routes calls over traditional phone networks ? not the Internet," the report states. "As a result, long-distance calls are still cheap or free, but cellphone minutes are gobbled up every time a Skype Lite call is made."
By comparison, Apple and AT&T allow a Skype application on the iPhone App Store. However, that program only allows calling via Wi-Fi, and 3G access for phone calls is blocked.
"Most 3G networks should support Skype presence and chat," Skype's official iPhone Web site states. "However, Skype calling is not possible via the iPhone. Please note that data usage costs apply for using Skype over 3G mobile networks, so we recommend an unlimited data plan."
Skype told USA Today that Android does not support a full-featured version of Skype. And Google admitted it blocks VOIP connections at the request of "individual operators," without naming T-Mobile, the only U.S. carrier for Android at the moment. However, a T-Mobile representative denied that the company has requested Google to block Skype. Like Apple, Google must describe its process for reviewing and approving applications for the FCC. Those filings are expected Friday.
Google plans to offer a full-featured, browser-based version of its Google Voice application on the iPhone in the near future. And the Android maker claims the "latest version" of its mobile operating system would support VOIP, but no applications have been submitted.
Comments
If people want to use Skype on their mobile via internet without restrictions, then mobile carriers should make customers pay the full price for the phone, like us in India.
I actually agree with Google and Apple partial blocking the full use of Skype. If you want to use Skype buy one of their own mobile phones.
Its seems silly to me for a phone carrier to allow such an app, since the phone carrier partial pays for the phone and make their money via customer calls.
If people want to use Skype on their mobile via internet without restrictions, then mobile carriers should make customers pay the full price for the phone, like us in India.
I actually agree with Google and Apple partial blocking the full use of Skype. If you want to use Skype buy one of their own mobile phones.
You can buy them unsubsidized....you still can't use VoIP.
But, even with the subsidized phones, you more than pay the subsidy back with just your monthly contracted fees. Restricting voice usage simply guarantees additional revenue.
it's OK when Google does it because they're not evil. says so in their corporate charter
Apparently, but it still isn't enough to keep them from being investigated. So, who shall rise, in righteous indignation, to their defense against these absurd accusations?
You can buy them unsubsidized....you still can't use VoIP.
But, even with the subsidized phones, you more than pay the subsidy back with just your monthly contracted fees. Restricting voice usage simply guarantees additional revenue.
Also guarantees that you sending your revenue/profit to another company, who do little to advertise and support your marketing expenditure. The calls maybe free for Skype to Skype callers, but you pay for non-skype users.
As I said, if you want to use Skype, buy one of their smartphones.
Soul
I actually agree with Google and Apple partial blocking the full use of Skype. If you want to use Skype buy one of their own mobile phones.
Whoa, let's not muddle these two cases.
Apple approved Skype onto the App Store, but it's limited to Wi-Fi.
Google approved Skype onto the Android Market, but it requires the use of the customers voice minutes.
Also guarantees that you sending your revenue/profit to another company, who do little to advertise and support your marketing expenditure. The calls maybe free for Skype to Skype callers, but you pay for non-skype users.
As I said, if you want to use Skype, buy one of their smartphones.
Soul
You also said you would agree if AT&T made customer buy unsubsidized phones. They can, but you now don't agree?
As far as where profits and revenue are going, no, not all revenue can go to AT&T just because they are the provider. With your ISP at home, do you only visit sites and use internet services that are owned or approved by your ISP? If not, then you are potentially creating revenue and profit for the sites you visit and the services you use that are not going to your ISP. Would you honestly wait for your ISP to permit you? If you have ever used a third party calling card at home or on your cell, you are redirecting revenue from your provider...should you not be allowed to do this?
Aint I a stinker?
Its seems silly to me for a phone carrier to allow such an app, since the phone carrier partial pays for the phone and make their money via customer calls.
If people want to use Skype on their mobile via internet without restrictions, then mobile carriers should make customers pay the full price for the phone, like us in India.
I actually agree with Google and Apple partial blocking the full use of Skype. If you want to use Skype buy one of their own mobile phones.
I can see your logic.
Oh, just read Wobegon's post ... seems we are incorrect and as he says ..."False comparisons do not a valid argument make."
This is one of those times when I'm glad I have a windows mobile phone on sprint lol.
Aint I a stinker?
Na, just in the dark ages.
Cel service should be transitioned into flat rate data, with everything going over IP. They can make money off it; look how inexpensive unlimited minutes plans are now.
And I bet the companies would save some money too from not having to meter calls anymore.
Of course, you can't do this with pre-paid services, but those are in another boat anyway.
I wonder if their will be the same wailing and gnashing of teeth and cries of 'unfair, unfair' if google does get investigated? Or is it only wrong to question Apple and their policies?
indeed.
in the end though, at least in the case of Apple, the answer to the question may be in the contract with ATT. That contract is very likely worded so that ATT has the exclusive rights during the contract period to all voice service and all cellular data service provided to Apple devices (which could also be why any tablet won't happen until the contract is over. at least one with 3g). Thus Apple had to cut down Skype and cut out Google Voice for bypassing ATT service in violation of said contract.
Which could put the whole issue into the hands of the FCCs review of the legality of carrier/device locking. If they decide the time has come to unlock all phones from all services, Apple will have no choice but to allow a full version of Skype and also Google Voice. Although any such decision might allow current contracts to play out, just no extensions and all new devices are sim unlocked.
My only hope is that the FCC doesn't have the power to force any company to make devices for all carriers. I would rather Apple spend their time making the current iphone better rather than having to make a Verizon/Sprint capable phone
Will we see this same kind of action if RIM refuses an app?
I expect so. People asked, when the FCC started investigating Apple, whether they would investigate Google for similar practices. Now we know they will/might. RIM should expect the same treatment. That is sort of the point. If they investigated Google or RIM, there would be nowhere near the level of outrage or indignation that the FCC's actions. But, if it is Apple, then the investigation is wrong and those agreeing with it are simply Anti-Apple haters and trolls.
Whoa whoa whoa, let's not muddle these two cases.
Apple approved Skype onto the App Store, but it's limited to Wi-Fi.
Google banned Skype altogether from the Android Market.
I think the issue here is that Apple banned Google Voice altogether, while Google banned Skype altogether, which isn't all that different.
As far as where profits and revenue are going, no, not all revenue can go to AT&T just because they are the provider. With your ISP at home, do you only visit sites and use internet services that are owned or approved by your ISP? If not, then you are potentially creating revenue and profit for the sites you visit and the services you use that are not going to your ISP. Would you honestly wait for your ISP to permit you? If you have ever used a third party calling card at home or on your cell, you are redirecting revenue from your provider...should you not be allowed to do this?
these are issues that have been visited by the laws. and now the time has come that the carrier/device issue is being visited. Yes it seems a tad long in coming but frankly not really. No one really cared that much before smart phones became the rage and that happened about the same time as the iphone came into play. All folks really cared about before was keeping their phone number and having service at a decent price. So that's all that was dealt with by the legals.
Now with smart phones, we get issues of who services the phones, ETFs are becoming yet again an issue, rate plans (especially for texting) and so on. Given that cell phones as a primary phone only really kicked up in the last 3-4 years, I'd say we are on track.
I expect so. People asked, when the FCC started investigating Apple, whether they would investigate Google for similar practices. Now we know they will/might. RIM should expect the same treatment. That is sort of the point. If they investigated Google or RIM, there would be nowhere near the level of outrage or indignation that the FCC's actions. But, if it is Apple, then the investigation is wrong and those agreeing with it are simply Anti-Apple haters and trolls.
I don't find anything '"wrong" at all about the investigation. That's all it is, an investigaton. I see no reason to get all bent out of shape over it. I should hope even the most strident Apple fans (and I'm really up there) feel the same way. Apple has been investigated quite a few times over other issues, and really, I fail to see how someone can get defensive over an inquiry.