FCC Proposal Would Require Apple to Support iMessage-to-911

[MacRumors]

The Federal Communications Commission today announced a proposal that would extend a previous agreement requiring wireless carriers to allow their users to send SMS messages to 911 call centers. The proposal would extend the requirement from simple SMS texting to "over-the-top" messaging services like Apple's iMessage.

The four major American carriers, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile, have already agreed to make the SMS-to-911 feature nationwide by May 15, 2014.

By adding support for "over-the-top" messaging services, the FCC believes it can help keep pace with how people use their phones as users turn more to text messages rather than phone calls. Additionally, the text-to-911 feature could assist deaf users, as well as those in home invasion or other situations where making a voice call could be dangerous.

Today's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking anticipates that all wireless carriers, as well as providers of "over the top" text messaging that use IP-based or SMS protocols to deliver text messages to destinations identified by a telephone number, will be required to deploy text-to-911 and to provide "bounce back" messages where text-to-911 is not yet available. While more than 90 percent of smartphone users currently use SMS as their form of text messaging, we are taking forward-looking action given the growth of Internet-based text messaging. The Further Notice also tees up for resolution key issues including standards deployment and service deployment, location accuracy, cost recovery, carrier liability.

iMessage allows people to link their phone numbers with the service and it could be used to text 911 call centers, instead of using SMS messaging as a fallback. If 911 call centers don't support text-to-911 in a particular area, users would receive "bounce back" messages to advise them to call 911 via the traditional message.

As of now, this is just a proposal, not an official action, and that there is no set timetable from the FCC.

Article Link: FCC Proposal Would Require Apple to Support iMessage-to-911

[Schmitty11]

Lets the complaints begin....

[wikus]

Originally Posted by Schmitty11

Lets the complaints begin....

Why would ANYONE complain about this?

[Schmitty11]

Originally Posted by wikus

Why would ANYONE complain about this?

Oh, i think it's great, but this is macrumors. Someone is always unhappy about every story.

[Blakjack]

I'm game

[shurcooL]

Originally Posted by wikus

Why would ANYONE complain about this?

If you're a criminal, you would be unhappy that people have more ways to reach 911.

[Smigit]

Originally Posted by wikus

Why would ANYONE complain about this?

Not a complaint per-se, but SMS isn't exactly the best way to get a distress signal out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_M...#Unreliability). That coupled with some past iMessage service issues could pose a problem. I realise people drop calls and the like, but at least you know immediately as opposed to a text message which just zips off into the void.

Not so much a concern with having iMessage support specifically, but using text messages in general for 911 calls.

[Intarweb]

Originally Posted by Smigit

Not a complaint per-se, but SMS isn't exactly the best way to get a distress signal out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_M...#Unreliability). That coupled with some past iMessage service issues could pose a problem. I realise people drop calls and the like, but at least you know immediately as opposed to a text message which just zips off into the void.

Not so much a concern with having iMessage support specifically, but using text messages in general for 911 calls.

It's not a replacement for calls. It's an alternative.

[Black.Infinity]

911 should be accessible by all means of communication.

[Smigit]

Originally Posted by Intarweb

It's not a replacement for calls. It's an alternative.

I understand that. The point was that if you give people the option, they will use it, many over making a call when they could. With a call you know immediately if the communication has failed, an SMS on the other hand could be in transit for an unknown time (as per the article I mentioned), and even if it gets to the end point you still don't know if its being actioned. Emergency service staff aren't unknown to slip up.

It'll be useful in some cases, but the risk is that someone will send an SMS and immediately assume they have done all they can. There will be cases where people will use the less reliable service despite being fully capable of making a phone call. I saw not long ago someone on the news had used a phone to post a distress message on Facebook instead of calling emergency services, which is kind of sad.

[John.B]

Originally Posted by Smigit

Not a complaint per-se, but SMS isn't exactly the best way to get a distress signal out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_M...#Unreliability). That coupled with some past iMessage service issues could pose a problem. I realise people drop calls and the like, but at least you know immediately as opposed to a text message which just zips off into the void.

Not so much a concern with having iMessage support specifically, but using text messages in general for 911 calls.

Agree.

Text messages -- even text messages to 911 -- are merely a notification; until you get a confirmation from the receiving party, you can't assume any actual communication took place.

Also, this assumes that the text message service availability is guaranteed, which I'd bet flies in the face of the TOS for most (if not all) text message providers.

[Dr McKay]

Originally Posted by wikus

Why would ANYONE complain about this?

Because someone would see the title saying "would require Apple to.." And start in a huge rage along the lines of

"HOW DARE SOMEBODY TELL APPLE WHAT TO DO!! APPLE SHOULD JUST BUY FCC!"

[wikus]

Originally Posted by Dr McKay

Because someone would see the title saying "would require Apple to.." And start in a huge rage along the lines of

"HOW DARE SOMEBODY TELL APPLE WHAT TO DO!! APPLE SHOULD JUST BUY FCC!"

LOL! Has anyone said that in this thread? I wouldnt be surprised if there was more than one person making the comment...

[NAG]

Originally Posted by wikus

LOL! Has anyone said that in this thread? I wouldnt be surprised if there was more than one person making the comment...

Worst I've seen is comments like "they should make it Facetime instead" which actually makes sense.

[Dr McKay]

Originally Posted by wikus

LOL! Has anyone said that in this thread? I wouldnt be surprised if there was more than one person making the comment...

Do you remember the uproar about Micro-USB for iPhone in European countries? Apple themselves offered to conform to these guidelines and the thread was full of hatred and comments such as

"How dare the EU tell Apple what to do! Apple should stop selling products in Europe!"

And this was Apple offering to conform to a set of suggested guidelines.

[John.B]

Originally Posted by wikus

Why would ANYONE complain about this?

Because it seems simple on its face, but the devil is in the details?

[wordoflife]

This is a pretty good idea. I mean, after all, iMessage isn't an opt-in feature. I think it's automatically enabled by default.

The only interesting part if this will only be for iPhones ... or all iMessage devices

[KdParker]

Originally Posted by wordoflife

This is a pretty good idea. I mean, after all, iMessage isn't an opt-in feature. I think it's automatically enabled by default.

The only interesting part if this will only be for iPhones ... or all iMessage devices

True. But this does seem to be an good idea.

Not sure what it would mean technically for apple.

[gmanist1000]

Hmm I wonde how they could implement this? Since it's only iOS to iOS or iOS to Mac. Guess they could add emergency services :P

[BiigBiscuit]

Originally Posted by KdParker

True. But this does seem to be an good idea.

Not sure what it would mean technically for apple.

Probably nothing. Until iMessage goes down and someone that wasn't able to contact 911 via text gets hurt. I wouldn't be surprised if there'd be some sort of an uproar because of that.

[xionxiox]

Originally Posted by BiigBiscuit

Probably nothing. Until iMessage goes down and someone that wasn't able to contact 911 via text gets hurt. I wouldn't be surprised if there'd be some sort of an uproar because of that.

or they could call them like a normal person...

[tbrinkma]

Originally Posted by BiigBiscuit

Probably nothing. Until iMessage goes down and someone that wasn't able to contact 911 via text gets hurt. I wouldn't be surprised if there'd be some sort of an uproar because of that.

You do know that when something happens that it can't deliver the message through the iMessage servers, it falls back to the standard SMS/MMS services, right? That's how you can still text people you know who don't have iPhones.

[beingTommy]

Am I missing something? An iMessage is an iMessage because it's between ios devices...

[mrsir2009]

Originally Posted by beingTommy

Am I missing something? An iMessage is an iMessage because it's between ios devices...

iPads in the call centres

[Glassed Silver]

iPods or iPhones being able to set off an alarm?
Sounds perfect!

However, this is a slippery slope.
iMessage works great almost all of the time, but SMS seems more robust.

I think regardless of SMS OR iMessage there should ALWAYS be a reply that confirms the delivery of the message, too.
Otherwise it goes like a) emergency b) set off alarm c) alarm never arrived d) death/permanent injury/unwanted kids/gozilla/21st December/...

Glassed Silver:mac