map-for-that
Latest
AT&T and Verizon drop lawsuits, make nice for the holidays
Well well, maybe we can all get along after all: AT&T and Verizon just dropped their various advertising-related lawsuits against each other. We can't say we're surprised, considering AT&T lost its request to have Verizon's ads pulled down for the holidays -- spending money to litigate this further would have simply been a waste, and generated even more bad PR. Now let's just hope these two suck it up and battle it out over service quality and pricing, like they should have been doing all along. Or AT&T can just make some more nonsensical Luke Wilson commercials, whatevs. Update: Whoa, so this is crazy. We just checked out the other suit that was dismissed, and it turns out that Verizon actually sued AT&T back in July, but not for any damages -- instead, Big Red asked the court to rule that its various "Most Reliable 3G Network" taglines were actually true. That wackiness certainly explains why AT&T felt the need to push back, we suppose, and it makes Verizon's current whining over Sprint's "Most Dependable 3G Network" claims part of a larger, lamer pattern. We've included a shot of the case after the break, check it out.
AT&T 'hits' back at Verizon's Map for That campaign with an 'ad' of its own
digg_url = 'http://digg.com/hardware/AT_T_hits_back_at_Verizon_s_Map_for_That_campaign'; Boy, AT&T sure isn't taking Verizon's Map for That campaign too well. After losing a request for an injunction (for now), the company seems to have decided that the only thing to do in the short term is to start advertising right back at Verizon. Unfortunately, it looks like AT&T threw this one together in a hurry, grabbing a bucket of magnets and a board and sticking them into some abandoned warehouse with Luke Wilson and some Apple-ad-style music. Luke didn't even have time to shave! As for the claims made by Luke's magnetic board, it's hard to take issue with them since they don't really say lot. So AT&T's present and accounted for in this newly minted ad war, but Verizon clearly still has the upper hand... though this is clearly just the beginning. Check out the 30 second spot after the break. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
AT&T loses request for injunction against Verizon's Map for That ads
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?
Verizon responds to AT&T's Map For That lawsuit: 'the truth hurts'
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
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
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]