Although AT&T's false-advertising lawsuit against Verizon is a major risk for the company, intellectual property attorney Thomas Zellerbach thinks it's one worth taking.
Zellerbach's reasoning is simple: Verizon's "There's a Map for That" ads are doing "a world of hurt" to AT&T and the company needs to take whatever steps it can to get them off the air.
"I think they're very effective ads," says Zellerbach, who is a partner at the Silicon Valley branch of Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe. "[AT&T is] now getting beat up by people in the press and by other people over how poor their system seems to be."
Given the stakes for AT&T, Zellerbach doesn't think this qualifies as a frivolous false-advertising suit. However, he does think that AT&T has a very steep hill to climb if they're going come out of the suit successful. For one thing, he notes that the company is not challenging the accuracy of the 3G coverage maps showing that Verizon's 3G network covers vastly more geographical area in the United States than does AT&T's. Second, he notes that Verizon very clearly labels the maps as "AT&T 3G Coverage" and "Verizon Wireless 3G Coverage."
The only shot AT&T has, Zellerbach says, is to make a convincing argument that the average consumer doesn't know the difference between 3G data coverage and standard wireless cellular coverage. In other words, AT&T will have to demonstrate that the ads give consumers the impression that AT&T lacks any sort of wireless coverage throughout vast swathes of the United States.
"Presumably not everybody knows what 3G is so AT&T will question what's going to be the takeaway for the average consumer," he says. "Verizon is countering by saying that relevant consumer being targeted is the person who's into 3G smartphones."
Of course, winning the case is only one of AT&T's problems. The fact that a federal judge recently denied AT&T's request to order the ads stopped means that the ads will continue to air while the court hears out AT&T's case. If the case becomes a drawn-out affair, AT&T could still be massively damaged by the ads even if it ends up winning the case.
"If this goes on for a while then the damage will have already been done," Zellerbach says.
AT&T first filed its lawsuit earlier this month and alleged that Verizon's "There's a Map for That" ads falsely assert that AT&T has major gaps in its wireless coverage. Verizon's ads typically show AT&T users struggling to use applications on their mobile devices while Verizon customers happily watch live streaming videos. The ads then display maps that show the total geographical reach of 3G coverage for each carrier, with Verizon's map showing a far larger area of the country covered by its 3G service.
Post new comment