FCC To Investigate Apple’s App Store Practices

Published on August 1st, 2009

Posted by Uncle Dave in Business, Technology, computers, crime

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) late Friday launched an investigation into Apple’s rejection of Google Voice for the iPhone, and the removal of similar software from the App Store.

In a letter sent to Apple, the FCC asked the company why it turned down Google Voice for the iPhone and pulled several other Google Voice-related programs from the iPhone’s only sanctioned online mart. The FCC also sent similar letters to both AT&T — Apple’s exclusive carrier partner in the U.S. — and Google, asking both firms to provide more information on the issue.

The FCC’s letter asked Apple whether it rejected Google Voice and dumped other applications on its own, or “in consultation with AT&T,” and if the latter, to describe the conversations the partners had.

In other questions, the FCC asked Apple whether AT&T has any role in the approval of iPhone applications, wants the company to explain how Google Voice differs from any other VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) software that has been approved and requested a list of all applications that have been rejected and why.

Finally, the FCC asked Apple to explain its App Store approval process, something that some developers have said is so shrouded in secrecy that they don’t know the rules. “What are the standards for considering and approving iPhone applications?,” the FCC letter asked.

25 users responded in " FCC To Investigate Apple’s App Store Practices "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Mr. Fusion said, on August 1st, 2009 at 8:05 am

Some body’s got some ‘splainen to do.

# 2 robin1943 said, on August 1st, 2009 at 8:09 am

Looks like Google’s Obama connection is starting to pay off

# 3 peter_m said, on August 1st, 2009 at 8:14 am

Ouch, interesting!

# 4 Dall said, on August 1st, 2009 at 8:37 am

Isn’t it obvious? Apple and AT&T would rather have people pay for and use the iPhone’s built-in phone capabilities. They don’t want to allow for competition or multiple standards.

# 5 Angel H. Wong said, on August 1st, 2009 at 8:52 am

But there IS a rule for posting/selling apps on Apple’s Appstore: It must never compete with anything made by Apple nor offer alternatives to AT&T’s services.

# 6 MikieV said, on August 1st, 2009 at 8:53 am

Nice to see this happening, especially when Apple didn’t just reject Google’s app, but then pulled apps that had already been approved.

I’m a Mac fanbois, who has been using Macs since 1984, and I think the Apple’s handling of app store rejections is much worse than Amazon’s handling the George Orwell books on Kindle.

# 7 Joe said, on August 1st, 2009 at 9:02 am

Buy an Android phone, so that 2009 wont be like 1984.

# 8 MikeN said, on August 1st, 2009 at 9:21 am

How about the FCC not get involved, seeing as how this is one phone in a market of hundreds?

# 9 pecker said, on August 1st, 2009 at 9:29 am

Wow! The letters must have been sent out by an intern or new employee at the FCC that naively thought their job is supposed to do something about this.
Seriously, this is dangerously close to touching on a much bigger can of worms. If this doesn’t get quickly brushed under the carpet or dropped the telcos will have alot of lobbying to do. The moment telcos (and ISPs) are forced to properly open-up networks to a complete range of packet-based applications revenue from traditional circuit-switched voice will collapse. This won’t be before time IMHO.

# 10 finalbroadcast said, on August 1st, 2009 at 9:33 am

As Leo Laporte says, it won’t be long before the telcos have to give up the reins to the users because all they sell is the pipe to your house., or handset in this case, and their kicking and screaming as hard as they can.

# 11 moss said, on August 1st, 2009 at 9:51 am

Why should any company have to answer a question like this?

# 12 Jason said, on August 1st, 2009 at 10:11 am

Because as naive or idealistic as it sounds, they MUST be taken to task as what better place to start than Apple.

The ultimate crux of this issue is that the old guard are flipping terrified of the fact that data is data is data. Be it SMS, voice on a digital network or TV and internet. Where the cost to route raw data is so low and so much easier to upgrade capacity, they are going to lose their goose of golden eggs and they will be damned if they will walk away without a fight.

In a perfect world, we should pay, maybe $100 per month for EVERYTHING (Wireless and wireline, long distance or not) and there should be no limits on usage and no DPI or QoS.

# 13 JimR said, on August 1st, 2009 at 11:09 am

Bottom line…“What are the standards for considering and approving iPhone applications?”

If they said that they only consider applications that don’t compete with their own business applications, present and future, would that be enough?

# 14 pedro said, on August 1st, 2009 at 11:15 am

Great. Pound on mac! The only thing I have to wonder, isn’t a Google exec also a mac exec? Just sayin’

#8 Wow! You get the fastest dignity loss macfan award.

# 15 Rich said, on August 1st, 2009 at 11:34 am

Pecker stole my thunder. I don’t know why the FCC would have authority here. the F “T” C, possibly.

# 16 Dan McDermott said, on August 1st, 2009 at 11:46 am

Because the I-Phone is a device that operates on the AT&T wireless network which is licensed by the FCC. If this were a game on a GameBoy it would be a different situation. But there is a limited amount of spectrum available and AT&T has a license for a part of it. There are certain obligations, regulations and responsibilities that come with that. Not everyone can build out a wireless network. This is like the regulation of TV and Radio stations versus the complete non-regulation of newspapers. You can have an unlimited number of newspapers but there are only so many broadcast channels.

The FCC wants to know if a dominant wireless phone company is using its power and its percentage of the limited amount of spectrum to keep out innovation and competition.

Personally, I hope they get hammered and all their responses are released.

# 17 Special Ed said, on August 1st, 2009 at 12:01 pm

FCC? Big whoop, may as well be KFC.

# 18 deowll said, on August 1st, 2009 at 12:57 pm

# 16 nailed it plus one more factor. When you are a dominant player in any market they start looking to see if you are acting in an anticompetitive manner and if you are they are supposed to kick you in the privates hard enough you change your ways.

They almost never do this especially if you are a small player but it looks like Apple just made the big time. Way to go Apple!

# 19 ahtnos said, on August 1st, 2009 at 4:28 pm

Somebody needs to look into the app store. Microsoft got in big trouble for simply including their browser with their OS. Imagine if all software on your PC had to be approved by Microsoft, sold through Microsoft, and Microsoft would get a cut of everything. It would be ridiculous. Granted, Apple doesn’t have a hugely dominant market share in the smart phone market. However, that doesn’t make what Apple’s doing any better.

# 20 Uncle Patso said, on August 1st, 2009 at 9:16 pm

#9 pecker mentioned “traditional circuit-switched voice” as though it were a dinosaur. Well, I’ll say this about that dinosaur: it’s about a hundred times more reliable all the rest. I always make sure to have a phone line powered in the house. During the big ice storm last winter and the windstorm last fall (remnants of Hurricane Ike), power was out to hundreds of thousands, cell towers lost power, DSL connections were out, but our phone always worked. When one of our ISP’s servers died, when the entire ‘net was sluggish, our phone still worked.

For the best odds of being able to reach somebody in a time of crisis, keep a wireline connection and a line-powered phone handy.

# 21 KMFIX said, on August 2nd, 2009 at 1:51 am

Their hardware… Their choice.

Don’t like it.. Choose another phone.

# 22 pedro said, on August 2nd, 2009 at 3:16 am

#21 That’s what I say. But there are so many dimwits and masochists around these days that being abused seems a plus rather than an issue.

# 23 Mr. Fusion said, on August 2nd, 2009 at 7:20 am

#21, KMART,

Finding another phone is a great idea. Then Apple and AT&T can go find another wave length.

Currently, ALL wavelengths belong to the people. They are divided up according to FCC regulations and oversight. If you don’t like the FCC regulations for public airwaves, go find your own.

# 24 JimD said, on August 2nd, 2009 at 7:47 am

This is what happens when you enter Steve’s “Reality Distortion Field” and “Drink the Kool-aid” !!! Just remember to HAND OVER YOUR WALLET ON THE WAY IN !!!

# 25 Mr. Fusion said, on August 2nd, 2009 at 3:27 pm

#19, nos,

Microsoft got in big trouble for simply including their browser with their OS

Not quite. They got into big trouble for including their browser and penalizing any OEM that included Netscape along with Windows. This is called “restraint of trade” and is illegal. People would have to d/l a version of Netscape on their own. D/l a 25+ mb app over dial-up was not a quick, easy endeavor.

Imagine if all software on your PC had to be approved by Microsoft,

MicroSoft did control who got access to the source code and could tie their apps to Windows. Part of the Trust agreement was to allow more access without restrictions.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!