AT&T Takes Verizon to Court Over TV Ad Burn

It is not misleading. It clearly is comparing their 3G coverage to AT&T's complete LACK of 3G coverage. It is AT&T who tried to mislead their customers about their coverage.

Verizon has a point with 3G coverage, though it's of course misleading (which isn't unusual for advertisement). Edge (2G) is the only option in my area with AT&T -- even if they promised availability for Q1 2008 -- and Verizon indeed offers 3G. Not essential, but Vz certainly expanded their network quicker than AT&T. Annoying, but no deal breaker. Everywhere else i go seems to be 3G for AT&T as well.

Since they are comparing 3G coverage to 3G coverage, I don't see a problem. AT&T should be confident with it's product but it sounds like they are not.

I would agree that it is misleading, but the ad isn't lying when comparing *3G* coverage. But the general public won't think *3G* coverage, instead they'll just think *coverage*. If Verizon were to alter the ad to include all forms of coverage, then it would be doing justice.
So I would say that AT&T has a case on this one.

So because advertisers have taught people to not think over the years, Verizon has a case? I don't think so. I mean, they may have a case in today's society but it's not a just case.

I think Verizon needs to rerun its numbers, the picture looks like a lot more than 5 times...

I love the commercial... It shows that AT&T needs to stop paying big bucks to its executive staff and reinvest into infrastructure..

Hey AT&T what's next, you going to sue T-Mobile for having a $50.00 unlimited voice plan?

I've learned one valuable thing from this, being an AT&T wireless customer:

Don't go to Alaska, North Dakota, Montana or Wyoming lol

Actually, my phone is quad-band GSM and I have a package where I pay no long distance, no roaming fees, and no administration fees as long as it's usage on a US cell service tower.

ATT has no case. Verizon is not comparing total ATT coverage just their 3G which ATT admitted in a statement. ATT is just butt hurt that Verizon called them out on it. It specifically states "3G Coverage". How is this any more misleading than when ATT claims to have the largest 3G coverage when it obviously doesn't.

I think *AT&T* has a case btw. Counting on whether or not people think has nothing to do with it. Advertising only counts on perception, and it is obvious that the perception they are counting on is that people will think AT&T has extremely low or no coverage in portions of the US. Which they obviously succeeded in doing, but they made no connection to the technicality that AT&T has coverage in most places, just not 3G.

If it is true then they don't have a case. From what I gather I wouldn't doubt this information was true, however the Verizon map looks a little bit more than 5x the coverage.

They should have known they would get "Crap for that"

Verizon doesn't just offer 3G. They just decided to start calling there network 3G one day because it was a good marketing move. Where I live AT&T's 2G Edge network is twice as fast as Verizons anything network. When you're using AT&T 3G, it's at least 4 times faster. With a good signal you get there 3G+ service adn you can add another 50% speed boost.

Most of Verizon's marketed speed is only the burst rate anyways. Constant speed is nowhere near AT&T's. That's why AT&T threatened to sue them over the best coverage thing because AT&T said that speed should be considered when you start statng things like that. Then Verizon switched over to these commercials instead. They'll just keep marketing this bull until AT&T actually takes it to the courts. Verizon needs to learn that you can't just rely on software updates running on old tech from almost a decade ago and then attack a company that is actually upgrading it's hardware as well as software as it goes for having less 3G coverage when it doesn't really have any to begin with. Silly Verizon! Telling lies is naughty! Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done

It's not Verizon's responsibility to advertise what AT&T has and doesn't have. Verizon is simply pointing out that their 3G coverage is far broader than AT&Ts. They make it very clear they are comparing 3G coverage. They never say AT&T doesn't have service in those areas, they simply say AT&T doesn't offer 3G in those areas, which is 100% accurate.

If you don't know what 3G is, that's your fault. In fact, it's more dishonest for AT&T to claim it has the largest data network, ignoring the fact that most of that network isn't 3G. Look at this page: http://www.wireless.att.com/busine [...] /index.jsp, AT&T claims it has the largest high-speed data network, with EDGE!!!

No, AT&T has no leg to stand on. They made claims their network couldn't back up, and Verizon simply called them out. The judge should laugh this case out of the court room.

ATT is WAYYY more misleading then Verizon. ATT makes it sound like you'll get awesome service anywhere, but anyone that has a GSM phone knows, thats total BS regardless of who the provider is. You want service, stick with CDMA

Oh, I'm sorry AT&T. You are mad because Verizon would not help further your bullshit by showing your "2G" coverage map and label it 3G coverage? That is actually "truth in advertising". If you cannot deal with that, then you need to improve your 3G coverage.

Of course, none of this is going to happen until you quit investing in dead, useless fuck technologies.

Seems to me like AT&T was just owned and is sore...

It is only misleading to extreme idiots that have no place owning a cellular phone. Verizon plainly states that they are discussing 3G coverage. AT&T has overstepped their bounds and I hope that Verizon counter-sues for AT&T costing them(Verizon) money.

It's funny how verifiable facts can even get you taken to court these days. What a joke.

AT&T wants to take Verizon to court because they pointed out their Follies. Heaven forbid that anyone mention the emperor has no cloths.

Huh?

The ad specifies 3G Coverage, the map shows 3G coverage.

Regardless of what advertising relies upon, AT&T cannot possibly have a case based on the assumption that the average TV viewer doesn't read what's on the screen.

that was jokes grow a pair AT&T. you have already robbed people through the iphone let someone else have the limelight.
P.S: i'm not a verizon fanboy, or even a cell phone fanboy, because my life style just doesn't really need a high tech device to make calls. I own a Motorola i335 which i received for free.

Grow a pair AT&T, you have already robbed people thorugh the iphone, why cant u let anyone else have the limelight?

P.S: I am not a Verizon Fanboy, or a cellphone fanboy for that matter. I own a Motorola i335

Yeah,

I don't see how AT&T can claim that to be misleading. It is plainly labeled "3G Coverage". Plain as day. What AT&T is saying is that they prey on the stupidity of the customer and that if customers become educated, that they will fail.

I agree that AT&T has it's panties in a big fat bunch

I don't get it. Why would it be misleading? They are clearly comparing 3G coverage which AT&T is clearly lacking. These are facts. They are not responsible for educating consumers on AT&T's other offerings.

Most of the USA is covered by either GSM or HSPA, not 2G CDMA. 2G CDMA is just an obsolete technology like TDMA is.

Ah another STUPID court case to waist time money and valuable resources. We wonder why our courts are behind. AT&T Verizon is NOT doing a commercial for you it is for them (V). All this political crap is going to waist time and how many millions for court/lawyer fees. Heck have our technology have as many law suits as health care we might have to get a federal phone plan insurance.

Im from the midwest and AT&T has NO service under their name here, there is service under Iwireless and Long Lines (both co-own towers with little help from AT&T) and trust me there is not even a hint of even 2G. Verizon speeds are slow as mentioned earlier but its a sales pitch (label) but I have gone from the east coast to Glacier Nat Park Montana and never lost signal. They got the fancy "software" to claim 3G nationwide (more or less) AT&T decided to get "hardware" for limited locations (but with bigger population centers). So your choice and life style.
And this comes from a US cell fan because of 1000 min 500 txt plan for $20. arent discounts are wonderful?

AT&T is just mad and jealous that they lie about their claims of having the largest 3G network, and that they suck at providing 3G coverage. Verizon compares its own 3G network with AT&T's. Because Verizon is more up to date with its software and technical cell phone coverage and only serves 3G service, it is making AT&T jealous. Iphone is over-rated and all hype.

Verizon does specify VERY CLEARLY that they are comparing 3G coverage. They didn't say "overall coverage"

IMO since the ad Clearly states that it's comparing 3G coverage, AT&T should lose this one. Anyone who has used both Verizon and AT&T already knows how much better the coverage is on Verizon. It's probably the only reason the iPhone hasn't completely taken over the market.