Are We Really Free to Call Over Wi-Fi? Or Is the Gate Still Guarded?

This is the expanded version of my post on Linked in. 

Here’s a question worth asking: Why is it still so hard to use a third-party Wi-Fi calling app on your phone? I love Whatsapp and Signal. I use them all the time. In certain places I use Lime and WeChat. Enter a small company VoIP-Pal. 

VoIP-Pal, a company with a long history of litigation but no real product success, has launched fresh antitrust lawsuits against Apple, Google, Samsung, and the usual telecom suspects—AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile. The claim? That Big Tech and Big Telco are quietly colluding to kill off independent Wi-Fi calling apps. But wait you say isn’t VoIP like ubiquitous? VoIP was originally from Bell Labs in the 1980s. The first commercial product was released by VocalTec Communications in 1995. 

NOTE: really interesting side story on the inventor of VoIP) - Dr Marian Croak check out her story.

Now before we file this under “patent troll drama,” let’s unpack both sides.

If VoIP-Pal is right:

• Apple and Google may be exercising classic gatekeeper behavior by rejecting legitimate apps.

• Telecoms may be applying behind-the-scenes pressure to preserve their control of voice services.

• Consumers in poor coverage areas — think rural zones, hospitals, or even basements — are left without alternatives that could serve them better.

But if VoIP-Pal is just trolling for a payout:

• They’ve sued everyone under the sun (Apple, Amazon, Twitter) without ever shipping anything.

• Their patents may be too vague to defend — the kind that describe an idea, not an innovation.

• This could be another fishing expedition for settlement money, not real market impact.

Here’s where it gets interesting. If they win, app stores might finally be forced open to serious third-party Wi-Fi calling tools. That’s a win for competition and consumer choice.

If they lose? Maybe nothing changes. Or maybe we just accept that app store policy and carrier collusion are baked into the system now.

So my question… is this a legitimate case of anticompetitive behavior? Or just one more lawsuit trying to extract rent from deep pockets?

#WiFiCalling #Telecom #BigTech #PatentLaw #Antitrust #VoiceTech #AppStores #Innovation

VoIP-Pal Patents

From their portfolio listings  , VoIP‑Pal highlights several core U.S. patents, most notably:

• US 8,542,815 (B2) – “Producing routing messages for Voice over IP communications”

• US 8,774,378 (B2)

• US 9,137,385 (B2)

• US 9,179,005 (B2)

• US 9,537,762 (B2)

• US 9,813,330 (B2)

• US 9,826,002 (B2)

• US 9,948,549 (B2)

• US 9,813,330 and US 9,826,002 were both asserted in its mid‑2024 filings 

• They also hold US 10,218,606, which is central to newer suits 

So, patents commonly mentioned in their cases: ’815, ’005, ’762, ’330, ’002, ’549, and ’606.

Significant Lawsuits

1. Patent-Infringement Actions

• Western District of Texas (Waco) cases (mid‑2024 / early‑2025):

  Asserted ’762, ’330, ’002, ’549 against Apple, Amazon, Twitter, AT&T, Verizon, Google, Samsung, etc. 

2. Antitrust/Class-Action Lawsuit

• Filed June 2024 against Apple, Google, Samsung, AT&T, Verizon, T‑Mobile—claiming coordinated block of third‑party Wi‑Fi calling apps 

3. Earlier Apple Suits (2016–2020)

• Asserted ’815 & ’005 in a 2016 Nevada suit, stayed, then later invalidated under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in N. California (Judge Koh) 

• In 2018, filed a second suit with ’762, ’330, ’002, ’549; again invalidated in California 

4. Declaratory-Judgment Action by Apple (2021)

• Apple filed in Northern District of California seeking judgments of non-infringement and invalidity of ’234 and ’721 patents after VoIP‑Pal attempted to sue in Waco