AT&T adds Verizon's Island of Misfit Toys holiday ads to lawsuit, demands they be yanked off the air
By Nilay Patel 
posted November 12th 2009 2:03PM
posted November 12th 2009 2:03PM
Happy holidays, folks.The spotted elephant, in a surprised manner, asks the iPhone "What are you doing here? You can download apps and browse the web!" and a Dolly for Sue asserts that "Yeah. People will love you [the iPhone]."
Ignorance != misleading.
AT&T a bunch of crybabies.. they should just stick it up to Verizon.. . either way I hate verizon..
AT&T should save the money they spend on their idiot lawyers and use it too beef up their network.
awww how cute, asspained tards sad that other companies are showing the facts.
It will be laughable that at&t will try to defend their shitty coverage. I how the judge is a disgruntled iphone user lol.
they've been sitting on their iphone gold mine for too long to not do anything about their shittastic network. It's time they learn a lesson.
Verizons next commercial should be toddler twins sitting in a sand box. One twin with a Big red rubber ball that says verizon 3g and the other twin with a smaller blue ball labeled at&t 3g. Kid with the smaller blue ball complains about the twin with the bigger red ball picking on him cause his ball is smaller. "I'm gonna tell mom"
I see nothing misleading or confusing about these ads.
That most likely means you know what 3G is, and the difference between 3G and EDGE, and the fact that AT&T's EDGE coverage is actually better than Verizon's 3G coverage.
Do you think everybody knows that? Everybody in the US? Everybody who sees that ad? People who don't know anything about it will look at AT&T's map and assume AT&T has no coverage in those areas. That's what AT&T has a problem with.
That Misfit commercial is hilarious.
The map is misleading how may we ask? I honestly believe AT&T's own map is misleading versus Verizon misleading AT&T's customers. Some places have pinhole gaps where "3G" or "EDGE" is colored. The Pentagon for example has EDGE or GPRS only and it's a big pinhole. Dispute that comment all you want, but it's the truth. I replaced my 3G chip on my 3G(S) and the Pentagon going from it's parking lot onto HOV-I95 has only those two services until I get to Exit 1A in DC/VA.
Why doesn't AT&T just grow a pair and fight back with ads of their own!?!
This says a lot about what AT&T is as a company. Instead of working to improve their customers experience, they get their lawyers involved whenever they get exposed. I think Verizon should be applauded for these ads, they are clever and really get their point across.
You missed the point really badly. AT&T already said they don't have a problem with Verizon's portrayal of their 3G coverage. They have a problem with the way it makes people think AT&T has no coverage at all in those white areas.
Apple humiliated MS on the OS in any possible way. MS hasn't even picked up on the Mac OS design yet. I so enjoy watching Apple is sinking with AT_T.
It's always amusing to watch the iPhanbois come out of the woodwork and argue against logic and common sense, only because their precious Jesus phone is stuck on AT&T's crappy network. It's just a smart phone, people. Not a religion. In all honesty, I really don't see how AT&T could possibly win this lawsuit. On the other hand, this is America, and people won lawsuits for spilling hot coffee on themselves, so anything is possible, I suppose.
'the heck's AT&T???
I like that the words "adds" and "ads" were both used correctly in one title. Thank you for that.
From the filing:
"The only advantage to the customer of being on a “3G” network is speed, and AT&T has the nation’s fastest “3G” network. A customer can do everything on AT&T’s “2.5G” or GSM/EDGE network that he or she can do on a “3G” network,"
False. EDGE cannot do voice and data at the same time.
It's a lot like EV-DO in that respect...
Points off for this post's unintentionally ironic use of the term "Ma Bell". The current AT&T has basically no relation to the old Ma Bell whatsoever, unless you trace its lineage back to Bell South, though Bell South was basically swallowed up by SBC Communications (which later became Cingular, then AT&T after acquiring rights to the name), not the other way around. You would never have called SBC "Ma Bell".
Verizon, on the other hand, is a direct descendant of Ma Bell. It is and has always been one of the original regional phone companies after the breakup of Ma Bell. In fact, it's one of the few that's basically been left completely untouched by mergers and acquisitions since then - it's still a "pure" baby Bell company. Heck, the only reason they even changed the name from Bell Atlantic to Verizon was so they'd sound less regional for their wireless customers.
Other then the fact that pretty much every baby bell now is back under the ATT logo (Qwest is still out there, but no one wants to buy them.) Then sure. You are right.
(turning light switch on and off) FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
ATT CEO: No, we will not upgrade the network, the republicans are in our pocket lets just sue instead
In the original complaint, the lawyers (or high school staff writer) describes the at&t phone as "an electronic device simlilar to the iPhone" yet in this amended complaint, I see more description of it being called flat out the iPhone or "the hugely popular and iconic iPhone." This is a problem for a number of reasons, but mostly because it sounds like AT&T is trying to take double shots at Verizon for depicting a phone that is assumed to be the iPhone and also complaining that the data coverage for 3G does exist in areas not labeled in blue.
I feel very sorry for David Balser, the Georgia attorney of record that signed this complaint on behalf of AT&T Mobility, because this is truly an embarrassing document to put your name on. Too many errors shows lack of knowledge of the technical material involved (3G has more differences than just faster speeds than older generations like 2G, 2.5G, and 2.75G). Opinions and unrelated rhetoric is inserted into the complaint to bulk it up and (dare I say it) mislead the judge and court into believing there is a case here.
However, it is pretty clear to me that the lawyers had no choice but to file a frivolous lawsuit since AT&T has no way to respond to the allegations in the advertisements. Why not launch counter advertisements instead of demanding the government intervene and silence the competition? Every advertisement on television that includes tiny print that appears for less than 5 seconds can be accused of misleading or having something to hide. However, if the statements taken for face value do not contain false language, then you should not abuse the legal system and waste everyone's time.
I hope Verizon and Apple join in a counter-claim against AT&T. Apple should sue for misusing their patented product to advance their lawsuit. Verizon should sue for fraud on behalf of AT&T's customers.
There is a major difference between these ads and the ones with the small print, these ones clearly make a point that they are comparing 3G coverage maps, the fine print in the ads state the carrier's statements in more detail. They also place a clear statement on how these maps and opinions were acquired.
I think Verizon missed the point of the original movie. The toys on misfit island were loved IN SPITE of their shortcomings.
Nope, I think they got it with the iPhone
Does everyone forget that the iPhone is ALSO THE BEST MP3 PLAYER EVER AND VIDEO!?! holla.
That's a joke if I ever heard one, it does both perfectly fine, but the BEST is not accurate. ZuneHD is on par if not better than the iPhone/iPod Touch when it comes to music and video playback.
AT&T suing over service attack ads... isn't that the pot calling the kettle black. AT&T can't stand the fact that people are getting sick of their service and a company is targeting those consumers, and they can't claim that people are confused about the representation of the maps, because any person who doesn't know what 3G coverage is probably isn't looking to get a smart phone or cell phone in the first place. AT&T should be sued for their rollover minutes ads... Why? Because they make it sound like you can use them when ever you want, which is not true, you have to go through ALL of your current monthly minute before the rollovers can be activated, why is this important, because most people don't even go through all their monthly minutes in the first place, meaning at the end of every month people usually have rollover minutes expiring. So customers are subscribing to plans at an average of $10 higher than an equal plan on other carriers just so they don't lose minutes at the end of the month that they probably wont get to use anyway.
AT&T will hemorrhage customers if Verizon gets the iPhone...
I'm an AT&T iPhone customer and while I have had no problems with AT&T service I must say these commercials are fantastic. Its hitting this company where it REALLY hurts and we all know it. AT&T needs to get its act together. Full stop. People in the USA pay too much on cellular bills for such spotty service.
they should have never gave the grinch a graduates degree in law.
Verizon will have to come up with a "There's a lawsuit for that" advertisement next.
Why don't they just fight fire with fire rather than crying to the courts because they were called names and other baddies.
AT&T needs to either stop complaining and accept that their coverage is terrible, or do something about the lack of coverage. I'm still 56 miles away from the nearest AT&T store...... And I dont live in a rural area. I'm in an area with a population of over 160,000 people. Only Verizon and Sprint here, for the past 15 years too.