Apple, AT&T and Google have filed their answers with the FCC regarding the organization’s official inquiry into the rejection of the Google Voice iPhone application.
Apple has stated that the company was acting alone when it chose to initially reject the Google Voice application on the grounds that it duplicated its dialer functionality, but has now stated that it is currently reviewing the app to determine whether the application utilizes VOIP to complete phone calls which would also constitute a violation of its application development rules, going as far as to list applications that have been rejected, the specific reason for the rejection and revealing that it maintains a small team of 40 people dedicated to reviewing every application submitted.
AT&T for its part has filed its answer and has reiterated that it played no part in rejecting Google Voice on iPhone and stating its commitment to open access of software and data services on its phones and offered this statement:
“AT&T had no role in any decision by Apple to not accept the Google Voice application for inclusion in the Apple App Store. AT&T was not asked about the matter by Apple at any time, nor did we offer any view one way or the other.
AT&T does not block consumers from accessing any lawful website on the Internet. Consumers can download or launch a multitude of compatible applications directly from the Internet, including Google Voice, through any web-enabled wireless device without the need to use the Apple App Store.”
This is despite AT&T actively changing its terms of service to block third-party applications such as Sling Player in the name of network stability while allowing others to operate without issue such as YouTube and Cellular Video which perform identical functionality.
The most interesting response was naturally filed by Google as it went into detail on the functionality of Google Voice for iPhone and the similarity of Google services to those offered by Apple, but has redacted Apple’s response to Google regarding the specific reason for the rejection, which was one of the questions asked by the FCC.
You might also like...
I won’t copy and paste this comment from iKeepass developer’s blog, as it’s quite long and should be read in context:
http://ikeepass.de/bl0g/?p=101&cpage=3#comment-1905
This application (iKeepass) is another “victim” of Apple’s review process, it was submitted eight months ago(!!) and they’re still rejecting it again and again.