Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AT&T Loses First Legal Battle Against Verizon

Posted by Soulskill on from the is-there-an-app-for-that dept.

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."

5 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. Can you hear us now? by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Funny

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

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  2. My wish... by jonaskoelker · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

  3. AT&T vs Verizon by santax · · Score: 5, Funny

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

  4. Re:Sue Me AT&T!! by clintp · · Score: 4, Funny

    It doesn't scale either.

    --
    Get off my lawn.
  5. Re:Surprised? by AlamedaStone · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.

    --
    "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."