AT&T Loses First Legal Battle Against Verizon

FutureDomain writes "A federal judge in Atlanta has declined a restraining order from AT&T that would have prevented Verizon from running ads that compared their 3G coverage to AT&T's. AT&T felt that Verizon's ads 'mislead consumers into thinking that AT&T doesn't offer wireless service in large portions of the country, which is clearly not the case.' Verizon argued that the ads clearly indicated that the maps were only of 3G coverage, and that AT&T is only suing because it doesn't want to face the truth about its network."

Can you hear us now?

[Rockoon]

Can you hear us now?
Can you hear us now?
Can you hear us now?

Sue Me AT&T!!

[happy_place]

Okay this could get me sued, but here's a joke I just thought up... (yeah, it's lame) Q. What did the snakecharmer say to advertise his business? A. There's an asp for that. wah-wah-wah...

Re:AT&T is the laughing stock of the industry

[xtracto]

This is going to go down in the book as one of the stupidest moves in business history.

I am sure there's also a map for that!

My wish...

[jonaskoelker]

Not having read anything about the case, and I know it can't happen, but just based on how ethical the slashdot comments make AT&T and Verizon appear to be...

Ahem.

I hope they both lose.

AT&T vs Verizon

[santax]

That's a bit like Goliath fighting Goliath. Where the hell is David?

Re:Sue Me AT&T!!

[snspdaarf]

I don't believe that joke has legs

Re:Sue Me AT&T!!

[clintp]

It doesn't scale either.

Re:Maps

[genghisjahn]

Stephen King wrote about a Dead Zone is New England a long time ago. The guy was/is a visionary.

Re:Surprised?

[AlamedaStone]

Can anyone explain this alphabet soup?

I'll take a shot.

1. Information wants to be free,
2. Ads cost money, therefore
3. Ads contain no information.

I think that's the gist, anyway.

Re:Can you hear us now?

[Anonymous Coward]

Find the Colbert Report segment on the AT&T evolution. It is downright hillarious.