AT&T Sues Verizon Over 'There's A Map For That' Ad Campaign
from the doesn't-like-the-maps dept
Recently, Verizon came up with a rather clever ad campaign, mocking the iPhone ads that claim "there's an app for that" with ads that showcase Verizon's wider 3G footprint, claiming "there's a map for that," and showing the two services' 3G coverage maps side by side:Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: advertising, lawsuit, map
Companies: at&t, verizon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Damn those pirates
Off with their heads!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Should get tossed...probably won't
So AT&T sells "coverage" - which is actually better than VZW, and Verizon sells "Speed and 3G density" - which is better than AT&T. All it does is signal to the public that Verizon is probably right, and AT&T is scared.
I hope Verizon wins, then runs an add clarifying that a judge agreed that AT&T's 3G coverage is only 20% of Verizon's. Put a little cost on AT&T's plate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I Had AT&T
Great coverage over the areas I was traveling for work.
Never had a problem with AT&T GSM.
Currently not a big portable phone user.
If I ever have a great need for a new traveling phone I will look at Verizon first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So this is not a copyright or IP battle
So remind me again why this is on TechDirt ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
"...the Techdirt blog uses a proven economic framework to analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies ability to innovate and grow."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So this is not a copyright or IP battle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad Idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At&t VS. Verizon
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People need a thicker skin...
Oh, and AT&T should also have to pay Verizon's court costs when AT&T loses this battle. But alas, the courts don't work that way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: People need a thicker skin...
Verizon is banking on the average consumer seeing the two maps, and going ... ZOMG, AT&T has no coverage!!! and switching providers based on gut reaction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: People need a thicker skin...
...and you fell for it.
If you were smart, you'd get your ass out of there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: People need a thicker skin...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: People need a thicker skin...
I'll put my money on Northeastern Attorneys over Texas Attorneys any day.
AT&T lost. Settle or withdraw. It will save face. You already have enough things going on buying congresspeople and such.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: People need a thicker skin...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: People need a thicker skin...
Verizon runs all their ads through legal before they air them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: People need a thicker skin...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You are comparing your apples to our apples but we also have oranges!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AT&T
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AT&T must be feeling the heat...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: AT&T must be feeling the heat...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Verizon shooting over the bow
They didn't even have the Test Guy in the ad, or mention their 70M users in the ad.
In all actuality, it's probably that Verizon's own tests show that someone has else has grown significantly more square mile 3G coverage than AT&T and are just trying to be nice. The lawsuit will allow Verizon to show under oath, in court, that AT&T isn't the #2 network, but perhaps now they rank #3 or #4.
Verizon didn't become #1 by acquiring companies and being stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why sue?
You can go to AT&Ts own website and see the SAME map. I haven't checked it in a while, but it's pretty close, right down to the blue color to designate 3G (I believe they use orange for standard coverage).
Verizon is trying more and more to push smartphones and high speed options like their video services and such, so why wouldn't they spin the advertising to highlight a strong point?
I have a Curve, so 3G at the moment is of no use to me, but when I get an Onyx or any other 3G capable phone, I might feel the heat of that map if I travel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/CoverageLocatorController?requesttype=NEWREQUEST
The re you go. ALL of their coverage types.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So, we are to imply that just because you cannot navigate their website that they're lying? Try again.
No, if you look at the link you provided which I obviously saw before I posted, is that it says NO WHERE on there "click here to see 3G coverage". The only option they have is for "Broadband Coverage". That could mean anything, including 2G etc. If you bothered to look at AT&T's coverage maps, their map that includes all "broadband" data coverage including 2G etc looks almost identical to Verizon's "broadband" coverage map.
So in answer to your question, no...we are not supposed to assume they're lying because I can't navigate a website, we're supposed to assume they're lying because you can't read a website and just assume what they're saying in print means what they imply in some stupid commercial.
On top of that if you read the fine print underneath the maps on Verizon's site you get to this nice little tidbit:"Some of the coverage area includes networks run by other carriers; some of the coverage depicted is based on their information and public sources and we cannot ensure its accuracy." So even if all of that coverage is 3G, it's not even all their network.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Furthermore, the non-colored-in parts of Verizon's map would actually indicate no service, whereas AT&T's only indicates no 3G coverage. (I think they claim 98% coverage in the US, or something like that.)
Personally, as a iPhone/AT&T user, I'd much rather AT&T focus their money less on lawsuits and more on upgrading their shitty (as shown accurately in the Verizon ad) 3G coverage.
Not that it matters much, if Verizon doesn't mess up the Droid, I'll be switching soon anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: attention
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Verizon lies
In any event, both the Lanham Act and state-law "little Lanham Acts" protect against "deceptive" advertising, not just "false" advertising. Deception can include merely misleading statements. If an average, reasonable consumer might be mislead by the advertisement to believe that Verizon has more coverage than AT&T (not just 3G coverage,) than no amount of disclaimer by Verizon will cure the fact that it is misleading (if, indeed, that claim is not true). Among other things, the ad contrasts a Verizon user with an AT&T user, and suggests that the AT&T user is unable to use their mobile device at all because of the exceptionally poor coverage in an obvious urban area. This is just BS.
AT&T has a good case here. And we should be pleased that AT&T is suing for the right reason - to correct inaccuracies in the advertisement. They _could_ have sued on some whacked out infringement theory, asserting ownership or registration of "There's an app for that" and asserting that Verizon was disparaging their famous mark.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Verizon lies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: no answer to iphone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AT&T is a bunch of blatant liars
Fact: If you don't get coverage on your phone on a Verizon network, its most likely your phone, as every antenna is designed different.
Fact: (maybe not as important) AT&T is IMPOSSIBLE to talk to on the phone. Useless and uncaring.
Fact: Verizon's map BLATANTLY points out 3G COVERAGE! not overall coverage. AT&T is doing its infamous suing!
Fact: AT&T BLATANTLY lies about usage of phone and internet at the same time.
Fact: AT&T BLATANTLY lies about its "faster" 3G network.
if its faster its because less people use it, cause last i checked, 3G was 3G. Maybe they should focus on Sprints 4G next, and claim their 3G is actually 4G and its still faster.... FAIL!
I only hope to see AT&T fall flat on its face and get bought out. For years they have belittled their customers, making people think they have to fall in line with their claims. If AT&T wins it is because they have a better lawyer and the fact that our court system is VERY corrupt. Just look towards the Monsanto cases to point out the true meaning of corrupt.
AT&T should be put out of business for being complete incompetent lying bastards.... sorry for the harsh words, but I CAN'T STAND THEM!
The business is just like dealing with Chevy. Speaking of blatant liars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Verizon is sooooooooooooooooooooooo annoying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]