FCC To Probe Google Voice Over Call Blocking

Over the past few months, we've been following the FCC's inquiry into Apple and AT&T after they rejected Google Voice from the App store. A couple weeks ago, AT&T did their best to deflect the FCC by dangling a shiny object in front of them — the use of Google Voice to block calls. It now appears the FCC has taken the bait, as they've sent an official inquiry to Google asking why the service restricts connections. "In its letter, the FCC asked Google to describe how its calls are routed and whether calls to particular numbers are prohibited. It also asks for information on how restrictions are implemented, how Google informs customers about those restrictions, whether Google Voice services are free, and if Google ever plans to charge for them in the future." Richard Whitt has already posted a brief explanation on Google's Public Policy blog. "The reason we restrict calls to certain local phone carriers' numbers is simple. Not only do they charge exorbitant termination rates for calls, but they also partner with adult sex chat lines and 'free' conference calling centers to drive high volumes of traffic." The FCC also received a push from members of the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Comments

Re:Wow, FCC with a clue?

[uassholes]

Maybe they're trying to cover their asses.

AT&T apparently now wants web applications -- from Skype to Google Voice -- to be treated the same way as traditional phone services. Their approach is what a former FCC chairman has called "regulatory capitalism," the practice of using regulation to block or slow down innovation. And despite AT&T's lobbying efforts, this issue has nothing to do with network neutrality or rural America. This is about outdated carrier compensation rules that are fundamentally broken and in need of repair by the FCC.

got my gvoice number this week

[SoupGuru]

It's a pretty interesting idea and I'd love to see what improvements are made to it over time.

I hear Verizon is bragging about their new deal with Google and Android while also stating they're going to support Google Voice. As a Verizon customer I hope that means I can eventually have other Verizon customers call my Google Voice number and get connected to my Verizon cell and not burn any out-of-network minutes. That's definitely a marketable stance to take in contrast to AT&T's.

Re:got my gvoice number this week

[rcolbert]

While I don't think Gvoice is the end-state of the industry, I think it's going to put a lot of pressure on the concept of minutes altogether. Remember when people paid for blocks of time for dial-up access? I think we'd all agree that the new broadband model, although still not perfect, is vastly superior. Once connectivity over the airwaves starts to approach minimal broadband speeds in a pervasive way, I can see a model emerging where people start to pay by bandwidth tiers rather than minutes. Then, how you use your connection is entirely up to you. Perhaps bandwidth sufficient for regular voice and text are the lower tier, bandwidth for a decent Internet experiences might be the next tier, and bandwidth sufficient for rich media might be the top tier.

Re:got my gvoice number this week

[maxume]

out-of-network minutes aren't particularly likely to exist in 3 or 4 years (Boost is currently setting the stage, charging $50 a month for unlimited voice, with no contract).

Re:got my gvoice number this week

[rcolbert]

These are all good thoughts, and the main theme in common is that something has to change. IMO the prime candidate for change is the outdated telephone rules and regulations. The more voice services that are exempt from those rules, the more willing the traditional telephone carriers will be to do away with them wholesale in favor of a more unified approach to data transmission. At the end of the day, it's all bits and bytes floating around from point A to point B. While changing the system isn't going to be simple, it is certainly inevitable. Who would have thought 20 years ago that we would end over-the-air analog broadcasting of television by now?

which members of Congress

[Dan667]

Would be nice to know who the sellouts are.

They could explain their better

[inio]

As a Google Voice user, I was confused when I tried to call a free conference call service and my phone never rang. No error message and the web UI acted like it was placing the call. I tried through the dial-in interface and got "that number is not valid" or something to that extent. They could at least explain WHY they're not allowing the call to go through.

Re:network neutrality

[thule]

I think they might be, otherwise they wouldn't need to block some numbers. They would be paying a flat fee. They blocked the numbers because those numbers are apparently costing them more than a normal number. Why?

Re:network neutrality

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I think they might be, otherwise they wouldn't need to block some numbers. They would be paying a flat fee. They blocked the numbers because those numbers are apparently costing them more than a normal number. Why?

Because their wholesale carrier charges google based on their own costs.

Like I said, if google really were their own carrier they would be subject to the same tariffs that all the other carriers are and this would be a non-issue because they would be following the tariffs. The tariffs are so ridiculously complicated due to regulatory capture that no one just "plugs in" and goes, they first hire an army of lawyers to parse everything and tell them what they must do and can't do.