TheresAMapForThat

Latest

  • Verizon responds to AT&T's Map For That lawsuit: 'the truth hurts'

    by 
    Nilay Patel
    Nilay Patel
    11.16.2009

    Sure, Verizon's doubled down on the 3G map ads in response to AT&T's false advertising lawsuit, but eventually the company's lawyers had to file a response and, well, ain't nobody backing down in this one. Here's the freaking introduction: AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon's "There's A Map For That" advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts. Yeah. It's gonna be like that. Verizon goes on to argue that even AT&T concedes the maps are accurate, and that pulling any of the ads off the air without proof that they're misleading consumers would be unfair, and that at the very least both parties need time to investigate further. Honestly? We've read it over a couple times now and while the legal arguments are certainly interesting, it's hard not to get the impression that Verizon drafted this response with publication in mind -- check out this quote: In the final analysis, AT&T seeks emergency relief because Verizon's side-by-side, apples-to-apples comparison of its own 3G coverage with AT&T's confirms what the marketplace has been saying for months: AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business, and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly. See what we mean? Now, we still think there's some merit to the idea that Verizon's ads improperly conflate 3G coverage area with 3G service quality, but that's really not what AT&T's arguing -- hell, it's busy pimping EDGE. We'll see if these two can solve their differences and get back to work, but we've got the feeling this thing ain't over yet. Update: Here's the PDF, in case you're interested.

  • AT&T responds to Verizon's 3G ad campaign -- by bragging about EDGE

    by 
    Nilay Patel
    Nilay Patel
    11.12.2009

    My iPhone 3GS, in downtown Chicago, as I wrote this post. Verizon certainly seems to be getting under AT&T's skin with its ads focused on comparing 3G coverage -- not only is Ma Bell suing over 'em, it's now issuing PR to clarify what it sees as the inaccuracies of the entire campaign. If you'll recall, AT&T thinks Verizon's 1:1 comparison of 3G coverage maps makes it looks like AT&T doesn't have any coverage at all across most of the country -- which means that our nation's largest wireless carrier is now in the sad position of pimping its gigantic EDGE network in response. Let's all gloss over the absolutely huge difference in 3G versus EDGE together, shall we? With both 3G and EDGE coverage, customers can access the Internet, send e-mail, surf the Web, stream music, download videos, send photos, text, talk and more. The only difference – with some data applications, 3G is faster than EDGE. Right, right -- the only difference. That must be why Apple named it the iPhone EDGE Slightly Faster. Now, AT&T has a valid point when it says that its 3G map covers 75 percent of the nation's population, and that Verizon's conflation of total 3G coverage with actual network quality is slightly misleading. But you know what? We watch our iPhones drop from 3G to EDGE and even to GPRS all day long in New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, and that has nothing to do with the damn map, and everything to do with AT&T's actual network quality. Let's put it this way: Verizon's ad campaign would be totally ineffective if it didn't ring so true, and the best way for AT&T to counter these ads is to build a rock-solid network, not filing lawsuits and issuing press releases bragging about freaking EDGE. We all clear on this? Good.

  • AT&T adds Verizon's Island of Misfit Toys holiday ads to lawsuit, demands they be yanked off the air

    by 
    Nilay Patel
    Nilay Patel
    11.12.2009

    Well, you knew this was coming -- AT&T's amended its advertising lawsuit against Verizon to include Big Red's new holiday ads, including that oh-so-cute Island of Misfit Toys spot, and demanded that they be taken off the air. At question is the same map of AT&T's 3G coverage used in the other commercial, which Ma Bell says misleads customers into thinking it has no service at all in large swaths of the country. Best part? AT&T's lawyers had to describe the ad in their new filing, leading to passages like this: 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]." Happy holidays, folks. Read - Digital Daily Read - AT&T's amended complaint [PDF]

  • Verizon takes another swing at AT&T, puts iPhone on the Island of Misfit Toys

    by 
    Nilay Patel
    Nilay Patel
    11.08.2009

    AT&T might be suing Verizon for misrepresenting its network in ads, but that doesn't seem to have dissuaded Big Red from using that same map image in this new spot, which casts the iPhone away to the Island of Misfit Toys. Hard to argue with the premise, but here's the real question: why not just sack up use a real iPhone, instead of this KIRF piece? Check the ad after the break. Update: Two more ads after the break -- "Blue Christmas" and "Elves." In case you were wondering, it's a sunny 70 degrees in early November in New York and Chicago, which is just about perfect for Christmas ads. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

  • AT&T sues Verizon over 'there's a map for that' ads

    by 
    Nilay Patel
    Nilay Patel
    11.03.2009

    digg_url ='http://digg.com/tech_news/AT_T_sues_Verizon_over_There_s_a_map_for_that_ads'; Whoa -- we just got word that AT&T is suing Verizon for false advertising over Big Red's "There's a map for that" ads. We're reading the complaint and motion to stop the ads right now, but here's what AT&T says is the big problem: In essence, we believe the ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T doesn't offer ANY wireless service in the vast majority of the country. In fact, AT&T's wireless network blankets the US, reaching approximately 296M people. Additionally, our 3G service is available in over 9,600 cities and towns. Verizon's misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T's strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers... and we've beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn -- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive. AT&T also says its network reaches about the same number of people as Verizon's, so we're thinking it's a little miffed that it's being portrayed as an also-ran here. We'll update as we learn more, keep it locked! Update: So this seems like a very narrow lawsuit, actually. As we've been told, AT&T thinks Verizon is trying to fool viewers into thinking that they can't use any AT&T phone services outside of 3G coverage areas by showing two essentially different maps. Since Verizon's entire network is 3G, the gaps in the red map are actual service gaps -- but Verizon doesn't show that the gaps on the AT&T map might be covered by AT&T's huge 2G network. We can see how that could be misleading, but at some point you've got to compare apples to apples, and AT&T even says it has "no quarrel with Verizon advertising its larger 3G network" in its complaint, so we'll see how the court reacts. Update 2: Interestingly, Verizon's already changed the ads once at AT&T's behest, editing them to remove the phrase "out of touch" and adding a "Voice and data services available outside of 3G areas" small print disclaimer at the end. Apparently that wasn't enough for AT&T, which says the ads still confuse non-technical viewers into thinking AT&T provides no service at all outside of its 3G coverage. Update 3: Okay, we've read everything -- there's really not much more to this suit than the arguments over the maps. We're thinking Verizon could have easily dealt with this by just using dark blue and light blue on the AT&T map to differentiate between 3G and 2G coverage, but at this point we don't think Ma Bell is all that interested in anything except getting these ads off the air. All that said, it's hard to deny that Verizon's ads made a perfectly valid point: using an iPhone on AT&T's network in New York or San Francisco is an exercise in frustration, regardless of whether you have 2G or 3G, and we've had zero problems on Verizon. Let's just hope AT&T is working as hard to fight these ads with its actual service as it is with its lawyers. %Gallery-77177% %Gallery-77176% %Gallery-77178%