Business News Holding

Tag: fcc

  • AT&T Enables VoIP over Its 3G Network for iPhone

    After “evaluating customers’ expectations and use of the iPhone compared to dozens of others AT&T offers,” the operator has finally taken the steps necessary so that Apple can enable VoIP applications on iPhone to run on AT&T’s wireless network.

    Previously, VoIP applications on iPhone were enabled only for Wi-Fi connectivity. At the same time, AT&T has offered a variety of other wireless devices that enable VoIP applications on 3G, 2G and Wi-Fi networks.

    In late summer, AT&T said it was taking a fresh look at VoIP capabilities on iPhone for use on AT&T’s 3G network, consistent with its regular review of device features and capabilities to “ensure attractive options for consumers.”

    In August Federal Communications Commission started the investigation asking both Apple and AT&T to clarify the reasons of the removal of Google Voice application from the App Store.

    Although we didn’t even know if the Google’s app would allow VoIP over AT&T 3G network, the company felt obligated to explain: “AT&T had no role in any decision by Apple to not accept the Google Voice application,” said Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president, external and legislative affaire.

    And the situation has changed. Dramatically changed. “iPhone is an innovative device that dramatically changed the game in wireless when it was introduced just two years ago,” said Ralph de la Vega, president and CEO, AT&T Mobility & Consumer Markets.

    iPhone users in the U.S. will now be able to use VoIP apps when they’re connected to AT&T’s 3G network.

  • Apple Explains the Removal of Google Voice from App Store

    Not long after Apple removed the official Google Voice application and any other applications that use Google Voice functionality from its iPhone App Store, the Federal Communications Commission has asked both Apple and AT&T to clarify the reasons of the removal.

    The companies just answered FCC and published their statements.

    A bit surprisingly, Apple stated that the company has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it.

    As they explain, “the application has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail.”

    Apple seems to be concerned also about the proper data protection: “When using Google Voice the iPhone user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways.”

    The company gives the examples of other applications that have also fall into this category.

    Answering the question if Apple did act alone, or in consultation with AT&T, in deciding to reject the Google Voice application, the firm assures that it is acting alone and has not consulted with AT&T about whether or not to approve the Google Voice application.

    “No contractual conditions or non-contractual understandings with AT&T have been a factor in Apple’s decision-making process in this matter,” the statement says.

    “Let me state unequivocally, 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,” said Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president, external and legislative affairs.

    “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. As a result, any AT&T customer may access and use Google Voice on any web-enabled device operating on AT&T’s network, including the iPhone, by launching the application through their web browser, without the need to use the Apple App Store,” says the company’s statement.

    Apple reminds that “there is a provision in Apple’s agreement with AT&T that obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone that enables a customer to use AT&T’s cellular network service to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining AT&T’s permission.”

    For example, AT&T’s Terms of Service prohibit an AT&T customer from using AT&T’s cellular service to redirect a TV signal to an iPhone.

    “From time to time, AT&T has expressed concerns regarding network efficiency and potential network congestion associated with certain applications, and Apple takes such concerns into consideration,” Apple says.

    Asked to explain any differences between the Google Voice iPhone application and any VoIP applications that Apple has approved for the iPhone, the company answered that it does not know if there is a VoIP element in the way the Google Voice application routes calls and messages, and whether VoIP technology is used over the 3G network by the application.

    They also assured that they had never approved any application that works over AT&T’s 3G network.

  • EMC Being Investigated by the Feds


    The Federal government has just announced in a statement that Data Storage giant, EMC is being investigated over its pricing and improper contract practices.

    EMC revealed in its annual report with the SEC several days ago that the US justice Department had filed a lawsuit against the company, writes Samantha Sai for storage-biz.news.

    According to the Justice Department press release, the lawsuit accuses EMC of failing to disclose its commercial pricing practices during negotiation of its General Services Administration (GSA) contracts.

    It also says EMC provided improper payments and other things of value to Systems Integrators and other Alliance Partners on contracts with government agencies.

    The lawsuit alleges that EMC tendered false claims for hardware and services on “numerous government contracts from the late 90s to the present”.

    It is believed that the lawsuit is based on insider information as the suit was filed in US District Court in Little Rock, Ark under the Whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act.

    Among other allegations in the lawsuit are that EMC, "made payments of money and other things of value (alliance benefits) to a number of systems integration consultants and other alliance partners with whom it had alliance relationships".

    The Justice Department further states "that these alliance relationships and the resulting alliance benefits paid by EMC amount to kickbacks and undisclosed conflict of interest relationships".

    The government press release also declares that EMC has been charged with making false statements to the General Accounting Service about its profit-making pricing customs to collect better proceeds on contracts, "thereby overcharging federal agencies purchasing EMC products and services".

    The report filed by EMC to the SEC mentions that the Justice Department is scrutinizing the company’s fee planning with systems integrators and other associates in federal government dealings.

    It is also looking at the company’s "compliance with the terms and conditions of certain agreements pursuant to which we sold products and services to the federal government, including potential violations of the False Claims Act".

    The investigation partly covers a previous audit by the GSA "concerning our recordkeeping and pricing practices under a schedule agreement we entered into with GSA in November 1999, which, following several extensions, expired in June 2007".

    To date, EMC says it has worked together with the inquiry and assessment and engaged in discussions aimed at resolving this matter without any admission or finding of liability on the part of EMC.

    "We believe that we have meritorious factual and legal defenses to the allegations raised and, if the matter is not resolved and proceeds to litigation, we intend to defend vigorously," the company said.

    "If the matter proceeds to litigation, possible sanctions include an award of damages, including treble damages, fines, penalties and other sanctions, including suspension or debarment from sales to the federal government."

    To keep things in perspective, EMC is not the first IT Corporation to face such allegations. Just a year ago IBM did clear up similar charges with a $ 3 million fine. Other companies that have gone through the same process include Accenture, HP and Sun Microsystems.

    StorageIO Group founder and senior analyst Greg Schulz speculates if the new Administration is just getting started.

    "If that’s the case, one has to wonder who’s next, and how big the boiler will be when the government finally gets around to the really big fish," he said.

  • Skype Questions Carriers Commitment to "Open" Networks


    Christopher Libertelli, Skype’s senior director of government and regulatory affairs for North America, has written a strongly-worded letter complaining that the major US wireless carriers are all talk when it comes to "open" networks.

    Writing to the Federal Ccommunications Commission (FCC) chairman, Kevin Martin, he said that if the Commission wanted to live up to its stated goal of making open networks more accessible, it would affirm that this policy covered wireless networks.

    Libertelli said that last week at the CTIA Wireless IT and Entertainment conference in San Francisco, the major US carriers paid lip service to the idea of open networks, but strongly cautioned that too much choice would lead to chaos and damage the viability of their business model.

    "The attitude of the wireless carriers was perhaps best summed up in Sprint Nextel Corp,” he wrote.

    He quoted Sprint CEO Dan Hesse’s recent comment: ‘The big Internet can be daunting… There can be too much choice.’

    Libertelli continued: “This stands in stark contrast to the Commission’s wise policies designed to promote as much consumer choice as possible."

    He said Skype was mindful of the challenges wireless carriers faced in moving to an open network. But he also said it was not enough to simply talk about open networks.

    "Consumer choice, competition and free markets, not carriers acting to block competition, should win the day in wireless–now, not later," he said.

    "If the Commission believed that the transition to more open networks was going to proceed quickly, statements out of CTIA’s convention suggest just the opposite.”