TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home

Google Voice and the FCC: TechCrunch looks at the statements

By Chris Meadows

The statements to the FCC from Apple, AT&T, and Google about the rejection of the Google Voice app from Apple’s app store are now available to the public (with the exception of part of Google’s statement, which was redacted by their request). TechCrunch looks at all three of them, and then Michael Arrington writes about why he thinks Apple is flat-out lying. (Steve Gillmor of TechCrunch has another look at the controversy, which is interesting but I won’t go into here.)

Update: Ars Technica also weighs in.

In a nutshell, here are what the statements say. I will discuss Arrington’s article after the jump.

AT&T (TechCrunch article; Scribd has the actual statement)

AT&T again denies having anything to do with the rejection of the Google Voice application. The company does have an agreement with Apple that Apple not approve apps that would cause undue network congestion on AT&T’s 2G and 3G networks (streaming video, for instance), and that Apple not approve apps that allow VOIP via 2G/3G without asking AT&T first. (In light of recent developments, AT&T adds, it will be taking another look at its stance on prohibiting VOIP apps from using its network.)

Apple (TechCrunch article (which also includes the entire text of Apple’s statement); another TechCrunch article)

Apple explains that it did not actually “reject” the application, but rather “continues to study it,” and did not consult with AT&T in the matter. Apple expresses concern that the Google Voice app replaces the iPhone’s core functionality for telephone calls, text messaging, and voicemail. The statement also goes into some detail about criteria for app rejection (most apps are rejected for bugs rather than content or terms-of-service violations).

Google (TechCrunch article; Scribd has the actual statement)

Google explains what its Google Voice app would have done, discusses other apps it has had approved by Apple, and talks about the standards for approving or rejecting applications for the Android app store. However, the potentially most interesting part of the statement—about a full page of text going into the nature of communications between Google and Apple concerning the app—has been left blank in the public version at Google’s request.

TechCrunch

After reading these statements, TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington accuses Apple of malfeasance in its response to the FCC. Arrington says that third-party Google Voice app developers told him they had heard in no uncertain terms—one from Apple’s own SVP Phil Schiller (the same man who has been going around lately trying to mend fences with publicly annoyed developers)—”that Google’s own app would be or already was rejected”. This is also what TechCrunch heard from Google itself.

(On the other hand, John Gruber reports hearing from someone who heard from someone at Apple as early as July 28th that “Apple did not reject the application”—which would suggest that Apple had decided to “further consider” it even then. Of course, from Google and the public’s point of view, there’s not a whole lot of difference either way.)

Arrington also explains why Apple’s “core functionality” arguments are inaccurate, untrue, or misleading (he suspects that the real reason is that Apple is getting alarmed at just how much of the iPhone’s functionality Google already provides), and hazards a guess that the redacted part of Google’s statement will tell the FCC a very different story than Apple’s did. He suspects that Apple’s backpedalling means that they are preparing to approve the app in some form as a face-saving move.

I hope Arrington is right. But whether he is or not, I doubt Apple will be able to stop the FCC scrutiny by approving the app now. Apple has woken the sleeping dragon, and it may not be so easy to put it to sleep again.