AT&T not happy with Verizon ads: 'There's a lawsuit for that'(tuaw.com)

20 pointsby theappfarm17 anni fa8 comments

AT&T not happy with Verizon ads: 'There's a lawsuit for that'

http://www.tuaw.com/2009/11/03/atandt-not-happy-with-verizon-ads-theres-a-lawsuit-for-that/

5 comments

rriepe17 anni fa

It's interesting that AT&T isn't disputing the lack of 3G coverage claim. Instead, they're stretching to say Verizon was implying something else with clearly-labeled maps.

Pretty inane. I doubt they'll win. It reflects pretty badly on them, too.

jamesbressi17 anni fa

Agreed. Total waste of AT&T's money to pursue this. Embarrassing on their part, if you ask me.

WAIT! Here's an idea: The money they are spending on legal for this lawsuit they could use to improve the network!

Ha, I know, that's just craaaaazy talk. Silly me.

100k17 anni fa

Anyone who has driven across the US with an iPhone (or, hell, tried to use on in San Francisco) knows AT&T's 3G network is total crap. I don't think they win by fighting this characterization.

wheels17 anni fa

If Verizon's PR people are good they'll milk this all the way to the bank. Let this drag on, generate a lot of press coverage, keep harping on the fact that AT&T really doesn't have good 3G coverage.

jrockway17 anni fa

AT&T should counter with a pie chart of "percent of population with 3G coverage". AT&T's and Verizon's coverage will look identical then.

(I used to have AT&T, and traveled a lot, but was never out of range of their 3G service. Verizon certainly has a good network, but AT&T's is not horribly bad.)

chrischen17 anni fa

I guess it depends where you live, and whether or not you travel. I frankly don't care if they have 3G in new mexico, as it wouldn't concern me, and I'd probably never go there.

[deleted]17 anni fa

(1)

buugs17 anni fa

Both maps clearly state 3G coverage in the ad and do not say network coverage anywhere in it, why even go for a lawsuit like this?