Judge Says 'There's An Ad For That...' And It's Ok For Now
from the let-it-play dept
Recently, AT&T sued Verizon over its "There's A Map For That" ad, that mocked AT&T's 3G network coverage, while playing on the Apple iPhone slogan of "there's an app for that." It seemed like an odd thing for AT&T to do, as it really just called more attention to the ad and the differences in 3G networks. Now, to make matters even worse, a judge has refused to issue an injunction stopping the ad. That doesn't stop the lawsuit, though, and the ad might still get taken down if AT&T wins, but it's unlikely Verizon's ad campaign is going to last until the lawsuit is finally decided, anyway. So for now, all it's done is driven a lot more attention to the ad, in which Verizon comes out favorably.
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: 3g, ads, competition, mobile service
Companies: at&t, verizon wireless
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Woah
There's a queue for that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The ads are awesome...
***Disclaimer*** I have Verizon service but I was not paid or otherwise compensated for the opinion above. In fact, I would drop Verizon for another carrier if there was a better one out there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The ads are awesome...
That was AT&T's objection? That despite being clearly marked as 3G coverage, that some idiot might think it represents all coverage? I hope the fucktard who decided to bring this lawsuit, along with the additional attention it got, gets his arse fired real soon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ads are awesome...
Chairman of the Board: I hate that ad, we have to sue!
Lawyer: I don't think they are doing anything illegal ...
C: Don't say that to me! Figure something out
L: I guess we could claim it is misleading because they don't have any 'pink' area representing 2G coverage ...
C: Brilliant! Do it! This is way I pay you so much, here's a bonus.
L: Thanks Boss! I'll get right on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a foot for that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"There's A lawyer For That"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's actually complicated...
Also, AT&T covers the vast majority of the population by being located near population centers. The map merely stresses the fact that America has distorted population densities.
I believe there are other ways in which this discussion becomes more complicated than a catch-phrase.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's actually complicated...
Hmm. 3G is for data. The voice quality wouldn't change if they were using 3G or 2G. It's just about the data...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]