Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   MarksAngel (profile), Nov 19th, 2009 @ 2:18am

   
   

   Your title made me laugh Mike...lol.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   BenJHare, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 2:56am

   
   

   Woah

   Don't get sued by AT&T there Mike...
   
   There's a queue for that.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   John Doe, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 4:06am

   
   

   The ads are awesome...

   I don't care who you have for a provider, those ads are hilarious. The fact that they piss of AT&T so much makes it even funnier. It is a shame that AT&T gets to sue Verizon over the ads as they are not misleading at all. They clearly state that it is 3G coverage and not all coverage. Personally, I think Verizon should get to counter sue for defense fees.
   
   ***Disclaimer*** I have Verizon service but I was not paid or otherwise compensated for the opinion above. In fact, I would drop Verizon for another carrier if there was a better one out there.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 4:20am

   
   

   Getting Sued - HA,
   
   There's a foot for that

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Ima Fish (profile), Nov 19th, 2009 @ 5:10am

   
   

   Re: The ads are awesome...

   "they are not misleading at all. They clearly state that it is 3G coverage and not all coverage"
   
   That was AT&T's objection? That despite being clearly marked as 3G coverage, that some idiot might think it represents all coverage? I hope the fucktard who decided to bring this lawsuit, along with the additional attention it got, gets his arse fired real soon.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 5:37am

   
   

   Need to sue someone for something... anything...
   
   "There's A lawyer For That"

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   imbrucy (profile), Nov 19th, 2009 @ 5:53am

   
   

   As someone who has AT&T I find those ads sad but hilarious. AT&T 3G coverage is rather pathetic and the 2G networks are so slow they are practically worthless.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   DCX2, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 7:24am

   
   

   It's actually complicated...

   The actual truth of the situation could require a lengthy analysis. For instance, Verizon uses their 2G network for voice and 3G for data...so even though you might have a shiny strong 3G signal, when you make a voice call your phone sounds like crap because it's using an old 2G tower.
   
   Also, AT&T covers the vast majority of the population by being located near population centers. The map merely stresses the fact that America has distorted population densities.
   
   I believe there are other ways in which this discussion becomes more complicated than a catch-phrase.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   Garrett, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 7:52am

   
   

   If I was Verizon, I would jump all over this...make a snarky commercial with a lawyer saying "At&T sued us over these ads. They admit they are true, but felt that suing was a better use of money then building an infrastructure. They want to be sure the consumers know that even though their 3G coverage is terrible, they do offer a wide 2G signal. So that phone you bought in 1998 will still work great! Everything else....well sorry."

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    Sean T Henry (profile), Nov 19th, 2009 @ 7:57am

    
    

    Re:

    You beat me to it. I was going to say they should start an ad campaign that says we have the widest 3G coverage in the US but there is a lawsuit against that.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    C., Nov 19th, 2009 @ 9:54am

    
    

    I thought there was a Visene commercial for all this first.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    

    The Groove Tiger (profile), Nov 19th, 2009 @ 10:16am

    
    

    Wow, everyone is copying the iPhone slogan. I suppose that now there's a fad for that...

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    

    TheStupidOne, Nov 19th, 2009 @ 10:31am

    
    

    Re: Re: The ads are awesome...

    But I'm betting it was the board and CEO that decided to sue:
    
    Chairman of the Board: I hate that ad, we have to sue!
    Lawyer: I don't think they are doing anything illegal ...
    C: Don't say that to me! Figure something out
    L: I guess we could claim it is misleading because they don't have any 'pink' area representing 2G coverage ...
    C: Brilliant! Do it! This is way I pay you so much, here's a bonus.
    L: Thanks Boss! I'll get right on it.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    Mike Masnick (profile), Nov 19th, 2009 @ 11:02am

    
    

    Re: It's actually complicated...

    For instance, Verizon uses their 2G network for voice and 3G for data...so even though you might have a shiny strong 3G signal, when you make a voice call your phone sounds like crap because it's using an old 2G tower.
    
    Hmm. 3G is for data. The voice quality wouldn't change if they were using 3G or 2G. It's just about the data...

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    

    Tutorial Creative, Nov 26th, 2011 @ 6:26am

    
    

    I was going to say they should start an ad campaign that says we have the widest 3G coverage in the US but there is a lawsuit against that.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    

    sprearson81 (profile), Jun 9th, 2012 @ 6:27am

    
    

    A lawsuit you say!

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment