|
 |
|
A while ago we’ve got tired of the endless dramas playing out among legal samurai. This one, however, kind of made us chuckle. If one were to split brains with a lawyer and PR rep, you may find something similar to Verizon’s response to AT&T’s complaint. The complaint stems from Verizon’s Map ads that depict 3G coverage in the United States. Engadget saved us some work and pulled out a couple highlights: 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. 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. It may be interesting to see how this plays out, but odds are nothing will be settled before Verizon voluntarily moves onto its next message. Verizon certainly has a point in 3G coverage. It does occupy more square miles than AT&T. If you look at a population map, however, AT&T claims it covers 75-percent of the U.S. population. It also doesn’t speak to 3G speed or quality, just where there is theoretical service. AT&T also makes the claim that the map doesn’t represent its data access through EDGE, but that doesn’t really help people who want to access the 3G network on their data plans. Verizon responds to AT&T's Map For That lawsuit: 'the truth hurts'
| |||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
