RSS
Twitter
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.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Your title made me laugh Mike...lol.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Woah
Don't get sued by AT&T there Mike...
There's a queue for that.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
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.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Getting Sued - HA,
There's a foot for that
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
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.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Need to sue someone for something... anything...
"There's A lawyer For That"
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
As someone who has AT&T I find those ads sad but hilarious. AT&T 3G coverage is rather pathetic and the 2G networks are so slow they are practically worthless.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
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.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
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."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
You beat me to it. I was going to say they should start an ad campaign that says we have the widest 3G coverage in the US but there is a lawsuit against that.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I thought there was a Visene commercial for all this first.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Wow, everyone is copying the iPhone slogan. I suppose that now there's a fad for that...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
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.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
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...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment