November 17, 2009
Lawyer wars: AT&T vs Verizon
If you’re a regular reader, you’re already well informed on the end of voice as a viable wireless business. Sprint and Verizon had invested heavily in national 3G data services for years, while AT&T lagged. Now that 4G is coming online and 3G matters to to a growing number of customers - like those who grossly overpaid for iPhones, AT&T is playing catch up. It hurts if you’re AT&T and one of your competitors that has been out investing you in 3G calls attention to that fact in advertising. True to AT&T’s track record it continues to prefer competing in the courts over upgrading. Perhaps AT&T customers who are experiencing poor data service should be careful about what they say publicly too.
AT&T earlier this month filed a lawsuit claiming that Verizon is misleading customers by suggesting that AT&T subscribers cannot access wireless Internet services throughout its network. In the opening paragraph of its legal rebuttal to the suit, Verizon very plainly surmised its argument: “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.”
The rebuttal filed on Monday in a Georgia district court was in response to two complaints AT&T filed with the court asking that the Verizon advertisements be pulled from the airwaves. AT&T has called the claims in the advertisement “false” and “misleading.” And the company claims it has caused “irreparable harm” to AT&T’s wireless business. (Cnet)
Verizon representatives have responded to the press on these claims. But now the company has filed its official response to the court in a 53-page document that lays out the company’s defense.
It’s also worth mentioning that if Verizon really wanted to put the hurt on AT&T, all it would really need to do is dramatically drop 3G prices. Since the wireless space is a cartel of spectrum licensees, that isn’t likely to happen. Still, a little competitive sparring is a good thing, There should be more of it. I’d bet even the lawyers agree.
Filed under Duopoly Follies, Litigation, Wireless by admin
-->
Comments on Lawyer wars: AT&T vs Verizon »
I would have to agree about the last paragraph. Trying to tweek AT&T on the nose with DSL is like getting a kiss from your cousin. Nice but it ain’t going no further.
DSL is still pretty much an intraLATA game between the Telcos. Sure there is overlap but its small. So there is not going to be much poaching.
If VZ wanted to really hurt AT&T they would sell the new Android phone at a ridiculously low price on AT&T’s network! When the data drops get to the point in some of the major metros areas as to be unusable then VZ swoops in with a plan say only $10 more. A cheap unusable network is useless and customers will leave in droves.