AT&T Sues Verizon Over “There’s a Map for That”
By Harry McCracken | Tuesday, November 3, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Verizon Wireless has been bashing AT&T and its products lately, in both its “There’s a map for that” ads snarking about AT&Ts 3G coverage and the “Droid does” campaign that says the iPhone is a bag of limitations. Now AT&T is bashing back–in court.
As Engadget is reporting, the company is saying that “There’s a map for that” misleads consumers with coverage maps that show what seems to be great swaths of the U.S. with no AT&T coverage, when in fact most of those areas have 2G coverage, but no 3G.
It’s not an irrational point, although I’m not sure if Verizon’s spot is any more deceptive than all those AT&T ads that say the company has the nation’s fastest 3G network. It does, but that 3G network is nowhere near as widely deployed as Verizon’s, so slow connectivity is far more of an issue for AT&T customers than for Verizon ones. (I wonder if Verizon’s ever flirted with suing over those spots?)
As Engadget notes, there’s an easy fix here: If Verizon tweaks its maps to show AT&T’s zones of 2G-only coverage, its ad will be just as compelling as the current version–and it’ll be tough for AT&T to claim that there’s anything inaccurate or confusing about the claim. Here’s hoping that this happens quickly, and that everyone involved goes back to spending money on improving their networks rather than legal wrangling.
7 Comments
Read more:
5 Comments For This Post
2 Trackbacks For This Post
-
Lies, Damned Lies, and Coverage Maps | Technologizer Says:
November 12th, 2009 at 6:18 pm[…] the iPhone to the Island of Misfit Toys–haven’t made AT&T any happier than the earlier spots did. It’s updated its legal complaint against Verizon to gripe about the new ads, and wants […]
-
AT&T and Verizon End Map Spat | Technologizer Says:
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:05 am[…] According to Dan Frommer at the Business Insider, AT&T and Verizon Wireless have agreed to end their legal tussle over the Verizon ads that slam AT&T’s 3G coverage. Good for Verizon. And good for AT&T, too–as far as I can see, the suit it filed against […]
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:54 pm
I’ve said this a million times…
THEY ALL SUCK. Period. End of sentence.
Even the “fastest 3G network” isn’t any good if its not everywhere(and truth be told, its not that fast)… and more 3G coverage isn’t that good if it’s slow(and truth be told, it really isn’t everywhere.
Why is the US so far behind the rest of the developed world when it comes to delivering communication services? Because companies in other countries deliver services…. in the US, all companies deliver is profits.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:50 am
The At&t VS. Verizon case is now online at the AllRise court. Join the debate and cast your vote – http://bit.ly/AllRise269
November 4th, 2009 at 6:53 am
@jltnol: Well, the US is HUGE, so getting 3G everywhere won’t happen anytime soon… And don’t get yourself down: exept for Asia, NO country has decent 3G coverage: I live in Belgium, with a population desinty 10x that of the US, and even here you can’t get decent 3G coverage – not even in teh cities!
As you said: all carrierscare about is huge profits: not through great service though, but through misleading customers and selling long binding contracts with, truth be told, great phones like the iPhone, droid and others…
November 4th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Its funny that AT&T isn’t arguing that the map Verizon displays in the ad is inaccurate, implying that it is accurate. The ad is all about the things you can do with 3G not 2G. They clearly state that they’re showing 3G-only coverage maps in the ad. If the maps are accurate, I don’t see what there is to sue Verizon about.
Interesting story.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
I’m not high tech enough to understand how all these things work all the time but I know that I can pick up with my Alltel in places that AT&T can’t