Home  ›  News  ›

AT&T Wants FCC to Probe Google Voice

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 17 replies

In the end, they have the right!

asLeepLessman

Sep 26, 2009, 9:33 AM
I have read everyone's response up to the time of this post and thus far, 95% of the posts are Anti-AT&T filing this complaint.

I'm my opinion (because really, thats all we can post about on this topic), AT&T has just as much right to point at Google as the FCC had (and google) had the right to point at AT&T.

AT&T (and Apple?) didn't want Google Voice. The FCC stepped in and said "Hey, you cant do that". Now AT&T is saying, ok, we allowed it but now, why is Google saying no to some calls?

Thats a very valid question. More so, "IF" some of those calls you cant use Google Voice to make, your able to make without it.

Anyway, my opinion on the matter is; AT&T has the right to do this and should excersise that right. This is America ...
(continues)
...
Slammer

Sep 26, 2009, 10:02 AM
You are correct. There is some valid points that you made and yes everyone has the right. However, I think that the whole issue in a nutshell is that most posters have seen the control that wireless carriers(such as AT&T) have tried to administer in the wireless industry. It is the classic "Do as we say, but not as we do" game. This needs to change and Google has called AT&T out on this practice. Call it spite if you wish, but it is what we call, the squeeky wheel gets the grease. If any playing field is to be escavated into a level landscape, This will definitely change the course and help to start the process. Consumers have long been the losers in this industry. It is time to change that.
...
en102

Sep 26, 2009, 12:12 PM
Exactly - what's good for the goose, is good for the gander. If they're going to be in the telecomm world, they must adhere to the same rules as everyone else.
...
Azeron

Sep 26, 2009, 12:14 PM
Google voice is not a wireless carrier. There is no merit to this and the FCC will strike down AT&T and should slap them hard for this wasteful retaliatory tactic.
...
Slammer

Sep 26, 2009, 1:07 PM
As much as I like when people agree with me, I'm not so sure you are. I am on the side of Google. It sounds like you are on the side of AT&T for which I can't support. We as consumers have consistantly been shelling out millions and millions of dollars to support greed. Even though Google is not a wireless carrier, Their known presence in the wireless world coupled with consumer driven practices, is shaking up the Status Quo of the neighborhood bullies. AT&T is obviously not willing to give up their neiborhood.
...
Versed

Sep 26, 2009, 10:39 PM
AT&T and the rest of the lot are far from being angels and are greedy, but so is Google, go ask Chinese Google users about blocked websites! There is no White Knight here. Both are wrong. AT&T/Apple should not have blocked GV, nor should Google be restricting calls.
...
crackberry

Sep 26, 2009, 10:50 PM
Versed said:
AT&T and the rest of the lot are far from being angels and are greedy, but so is Google, go ask Chinese Google users about blocked websites! There is no White Knight here. Both are wrong. AT&T/Apple should not have blocked GV, nor should Google be restricting calls.

thank you for pointing that out...
...
WiWavelength

Sep 26, 2009, 6:38 PM
asLeepLessman said:
Someone mentioned "The level playing field". The went as far as to mention that Google has tilted it a little away from AT&T (not necessarily toward Google). If this is true, in anyway, the FCC should get involved and make sure it wasn't tilted too much. After all, that wouldn't be fair.


"[T]ilted too much"? You misconstrue.

Envision that the playing field is tilted at a 60 degree angle toward AT&T. Google Voice tilts it 10 degrees in the opposite direction. The playing field is hardly level; it is still tilted 50 degrees in favor of AT&T.

asLeepLessman said:
If this isn't watched by someone (FCC, AT&T) then the tilting can continue and where is the fairness
...
(continues)
...
crackberry

Sep 26, 2009, 10:07 PM
WiWavelength said:
How would that "fairness" compare to the monopoly that AT&T has enjoyed for 100 years?
AJ


really? you say you know so much about telco industries but you say at&t has had a monopoly for 100 years. please show where? carter phone act, doj break up, buyout by sbc? verizon?

i have a feeling that we both hate at&t, but while i can argue their point from a capitalist point of view, you are blinded by ignorance. and if you can school me, please do. i'll gladly accept the public humiliation if there is no rebuttal.
...
Azeron

Sep 27, 2009, 4:50 AM
🙄

Uh-oh.
...
WiWavelength

Sep 27, 2009, 9:14 AM
crackberry said:
really? you say you know so much about telco industries but you say at&t has had a monopoly for 100 years. please show where? carter phone act, doj break up, buyout by sbc? verizon?


AT&T became a government sanctioned monopoly in the Kingsbury Commitment of 1913. Hmmm, 1913 - 2009 = 96 years. The monopoly persisted w/ the Communications Act of 1934, which formed the FCC and made AT&T a regulated monopoly. The FCC's 1968 ruling on the Carterfone device effectively ended AT&T's monopoly on end user equipment attached to its network but had no effect on its monopoly on actual service. Similarly, the verdict in the United States v. AT&T, which led to the break up of AT&T in 1984, only repl...
(continues)
...
rwalford79

Sep 27, 2009, 9:34 AM
WiWavelength

Seriously - that explains it all.

And Lily Tomlin totally rocks!

WE DONT CARE, WE DONT HAVE TO, WE'RE THE PHONE COMPANY.
...
WiWavelength

Sep 27, 2009, 12:17 PM
rwalford79 said:
WE DONT CARE, WE DONT HAVE TO, WE'RE THE PHONE COMPANY.


You might also enjoy Stephen Colbert's amusingly repetitive account of the insidious recomposition of AT&T:

http://www.glumbert.com/media/att »

Wow, really forward looking, consumer friendly oversight there, Bush administration. What did that imbecile W. say? "Big corporations are really cool. They're big like Texas. Let's see if we can get 'em bigger"???

AJ
...
rwalford79

Sep 27, 2009, 1:17 PM
Yeah, I totally saw this one.

I remember the monopoly then and now. I was about 5 or so when the breakup was mandated. Let me tell you, if you think prices are high now, they were high then. The difference however, the inflation price for services in 1984 is just about what service costs today, 25 years later. Why is that?

Monopolies - thats one answer.
...
Azeron

Sep 27, 2009, 11:21 AM
I knew you wouldn't let me down, AJ.
...
rwalford79

Sep 27, 2009, 9:11 AM
QUOTE :

I have read everyone's response up to the time of this post and thus far, 95% of the posts are Anti-AT&T filing this complaint.

I'm my opinion (because really, thats all we can post about on this topic), AT&T has just as much right to point at Google as the FCC had (and google) had the right to point at AT&T.

AT&T (and Apple?) didn't want Google Voice. The FCC stepped in and said "Hey, you cant do that". Now AT&T is saying, ok, we allowed it but now, why is Google saying no to some calls?

Thats a very valid question. More so, "IF" some of those calls you cant use Google Voice to make, your able to make without it.

END QUOTE :

AT&T has almost NO right actually to even mention anything to Google.

1. Google Voice...
(continues)
...
Azeron

Sep 27, 2009, 12:16 PM
No matter what happens, this means WAR. One thing is clear Google and the wireless carriers are enemies. It was Google who suggested that the 700mHz auction require an open access requirement. Many believed Google would actually bid on that spectrum. I'm not saying that I blame AT&T for being upset. I am sure all the carriers are and are hoping AT&T wins. They fought LNP, too until Verizon changed course. But I don't see that happening here. Google is clearly a threat and no one should be surprised at AT&T for launching this futile assault. Wireless carriers are not going to go without a struggle. That much is clear. But I believe that they will indeed go. They had best make their money off of voice and SMS/MMS while they can. B...
(continues)
...
Azeron

Sep 27, 2009, 11:20 AM
"AT&T (and Apple?) didn't want Google Voice. The FCC stepped in and said "Hey, you cant do that". Now AT&T is saying, ok, we allowed it but now, why is Google saying no to some calls?"

The FCC did not say "Hey you can't do that." What they did is ask is why Apple denied the Google Voice App? AT&T claimed they had nothing to do with that decision and apple confirmed this AND the Iphone GV app is still not approved nor is the FCC forcing Apple to approve it. In its response Apple maintained that consumers can still use their Iphone to access GV via the web browser on their phones which is also true. So what you are talking about I do not know.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.