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.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: at&t, verizon wireless

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Judge Says 'There's An Ad For That…' And It's Ok For Now”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
16 Comments
John Doe says:

The ads are awesome...

I don’t care who you have for a provider, those ads are hilarious. The fact that they piss of AT&T so much makes it even funnier. It is a shame that AT&T gets to sue Verizon over the ads as they are not misleading at all. They clearly state that it is 3G coverage and not all coverage. Personally, I think Verizon should get to counter sue for defense fees.

***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.

Ima Fish (profile) says:

Re: The ads are awesome...

they are not misleading at all. They clearly state that it is 3G coverage and not all coverage

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.

TheStupidOne says:

Re: Re: The ads are awesome...

But I’m betting it was the board and CEO that decided to sue:

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.

DCX2 says:

It's actually complicated...

The actual truth of the situation could require a lengthy analysis. For instance, Verizon uses their 2G network for voice and 3G for data…so even though you might have a shiny strong 3G signal, when you make a voice call your phone sounds like crap because it’s using an old 2G tower.

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.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: It's actually complicated...

For instance, Verizon uses their 2G network for voice and 3G for data…so even though you might have a shiny strong 3G signal, when you make a voice call your phone sounds like crap because it’s using an old 2G tower.

Hmm. 3G is for data. The voice quality wouldn’t change if they were using 3G or 2G. It’s just about the data…

Garrett says:

If I was Verizon, I would jump all over this…make a snarky commercial with a lawyer saying “At&T sued us over these ads. They admit they are true, but felt that suing was a better use of money then building an infrastructure. They want to be sure the consumers know that even though their 3G coverage is terrible, they do offer a wide 2G signal. So that phone you bought in 1998 will still work great! Everything else….well sorry.”

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...