You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
"AT&T described how the Verizon ads use maps comparing 3G coverage in the Verizon Wireless and AT&T network, using color to depict areas where each carrier has 3G and blank spaces to in areas where 3G is not available.
Because Verizon uses white spaces in its own maps for areas where it has no coverage, consumers are incorrectly interpreting the blank spaces on the AT&T maps to mean it has no wireless coverage in those areas, AT&T said.
"Verizon has stepped over the line of legitimate comparative advertising," AT&T said in the lawsuit."
They specifically state this is 3G coverage. If you don't know what that means, you're prolly too stupid to be using a cell phone in the first place.......
Or as Engadget puts it:
"Let's just hope AT&T is working as hard to fight these ads with its actual service as it is with its lawyers."
At first I thought this sounded frivolous but if I'm reading it right the Verizon map in the commercial is showing white only where it has no wireless coverage at all while the ATT map shows white where it lacks only 3g so that would be very misleading.
All of Verizons coverage is 3G so technically yes.
i work for att, 3g is great where it is but its so... spacey as to where 3g is... also, NEVER call att for ur home phone bill cuz ull get fhuked up lol do everyhing online!
Looks like AT&T's not getting its holiday wish after all -- a federal judge just ruled against Ma Bell's request to have Verizon's Map For That ads pulled off the air. That doesn't mean that this whole thing is over, though: the judge called the ads "sneaky" and said that it was possible people might misunderstand them because "most people who are watching TV are semi-catatonic." Whether or not that's enough to support a legal conclusion that the ads are misleading is a fight for another day -- specifically December 16th, when AT&T will have a second chance to argue its case. Still, this is a big win for Verizon -- everyone ready to be inundated with these ads for the next month?
Looks like AT&T's not getting its holiday wish after all -- a federal judge just ruled against Ma Bell's request to have Verizon's Map For That ads pulled off the air. That doesn't mean that this whole thing is over, though: the judge called the ads "sneaky" and said that it was possible people might misunderstand them because "most people who are watching TV are semi-catatonic." Whether or not that's enough to support a legal conclusion that the ads are misleading is a fight for another day -- specifically December 16th, when AT&T will have a second chance to argue its case. Still, this is a big win for Verizon -- everyone ready to be inundated with these ads for the next month?
Was wondering as I keep seeing the ads, you would have thought Verizon would have pulled them at least while the case was open...I guess they feel they are certain to win it and beat all appeals.
__________________ All the happiness in the world can't buy you money!
That's Incorrect. I do it all the time. And to back this up Work in Network Operations for Verizon.
That was convincing. lol
I was with verizon for years and never was I able to use voice and data simultaneously. I had a Blackberry 8800 and several other phones prior. What phone do you use to have this ability with Verizon?
AT&T Filed Lawsuit Against Verizon
