Wireless

Verizon Wireless and AT&T have ended their public legal spat over advertising, and have thus agreed to stop complaining about each other's advertising campaigns.

On Wednesday AT&T announced it dropped its suit against Verizon Wireless for allegedly misleading customers by showing its weak 3G coverage. And Verizon said it agreed to drop a suit it filed earlier this year against AT&T for claiming it had the "More Bars in More Places," the "Best Coverage," and the "Best Worldwide Coverage."

In its amended suit filed in August, Verizon said that AT&T had no basis to refer to its network as the best, because Verizon claims in its own advertising to have "America's Most Reliable 3G Network" and "America's Best 3G Network."

"Through these advertisements, AT&T claims to have a wireless network that is superior, both qualitatively ("More Bars") and quantitatively ("More Places") to the wireless networks of all other U.S. wireless carriers, including Verizon Wireless, both in the United States and worldwide, when in fact, none of those claims is true," Verizon said in its complaint.

But now it looks like AT&T and Verizon have made peace with one another, as AT&T dropped its case in Atlanta and Verizon dismissed its case filed in New York.

However, the lawsuits bring up an interesting trend that was noted recently in an article published by The New York Times. Increasingly, companies are suing each other over claims made in their advertising campaigns.

In addition to AT&T and Verizon Wireless, other longtime foes, such as shampoo and soap makers Pantene and Dove, dog food makers Science Diet and Iams, and soup companies Campbell Soup and Progresso have all haggled over ads, challenging competitors to prove their claims.

Some complaints over "misleading" advertising are filed with the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, which is the industry's main self-regulatory program for national ads. But others go to court and file lawsuits under the Lanham Act, which was passed in 1946 to strengthen trademark law. Verizon's lawsuit cited the Lanham Act.

While these lawsuits and complaints may be legitimate, the truth is that most consumers take these advertisements claiming to be the "best" or the "strongest" at anything with a grain of salt. And there is some indication that the mere publicity from these lawsuits can backfire on companies, giving consumers a negative impression of the company that files the lawsuit.

It can be argued that this has happened to AT&T. There have already been numerous reports about problems with AT&T's network, particularly for iPhone users. And when the company filed its lawsuit against Verizon, many consumers expressed anger at AT&T for whining about the advertisement, when many felt that the claims expressed in the advertisement were true.

By contrast, Verizon's lawsuit against AT&T was not well-publicized. In fact, most technology reporters and bloggers hadn't even known about or mentioned the suit until Wednesday when the two companies agreed to drop litigation against each other. It remains to be seen if consumers will also deem the dismissed Verizon lawsuit a bit whiny.

AT&T has lost the first battle in a legal war against Verizon Wireless to force the company to stop showing advertisements that compare its 3G wireless network coverage with Verizon's coverage.

A federal judge in Atlanta on Wednesday declined to grant AT&T a temporary restraining order that would force Verizon to stop showing the ads.

(Credit: Verizon Wireless)

AT&T filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Atlanta earlier this month asserting that Verizon Wireless' advertisements mislead customers by suggesting that AT&T subscribers cannot access wireless Internet services throughout its network. AT&T has called the ads blatantly false and has said that the commercials have caused irreparable harm to the company.

AT&T had asked the court to keep Verizon from running the advertisements until the matter is settled in court. But the judge on Wednesday declined this request.

The advertisements that Verizon is running show two maps that each indicate 3G wireless coverage. One map shows coverage for Verizon and the other depicts AT&T's coverage.

AT&T doesn't argue that the maps are incorrect in terms of showing its 3G coverage. But it says that Verizon is misleading customers by implying that they cannot use their phones or access the mobile Web when they aren't in 3G coverage areas. The reality is that customers can make phone calls and access the Internet from their phones using the company's slower EDGE or GPR networks.

Verizon argues its advertisements are simply pointing out the fact that AT&T has not invested enough in upgrading its network to handle increased traffic from smartphone devices, such as the Apple iPhone.

Verizon has modified its ads slightly to indicate that the map applies only to 3G coverage and not regular 2.5G service, which is adequate for making voice calls and connecting to the wireless Internet at slower speeds.

Verizon said in its 53-page rebuttal to the court earlier this week that AT&T is not suing Verizon because the claims are false, but because it doesn't want to face the truth about its network.

AT&T said it plans to press on with its case despite the fact that it lost the latest legal battle.

"While we are disappointed with the court's decision on our request for a temporary restraining order, we still feel strongly 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," Mark Siegel, a spokesman for AT&T, said in an e-mail. "We look forward to presenting our case to the court in the near future."

AT&T wants to set the record straight about its 3G wireless coverage.

The company has placed a statement on its Web site defending itself against critical advertisements Verizon Wireless has been running that highlight areas of the country where AT&T lacks 3G coverage.

"We typically don't respond to competitors' advertising," AT&T said in its statement. "However, some recent ads from Verizon are so blatantly false and misleading that we want to set the record straight about AT&T's wireless-data coverage."

Verizon's initial advertisement, which began airing on TV a couple of weeks ago, mocks Apple's "there's an app for that" slogan. Instead, Verizon's advertisement says "there's a map for that."

The ad campaign shows two maps with red-and-white splotches. The white area indicates no 3G coverage, and the red indicates areas where 3G service is available. In the ad, Verizon shows an AT&T map that has lots of white spaces, whereas the Verizon map is almost covered in red.

AT&T has filed a lawsuit claiming that the ad is misleading because it implies that AT&T customers can't use their phones in areas where the carrier does not offer 3G wireless coverage.

Verizon has modified its ad slightly to indicate that the map applies only to 3G coverage and not regular 2.5G service, which is adequate for making voice calls and connecting to the wireless Internet at slower speeds.

But AT&T is still not happy with the adjustment, and the company wants Verizon to stop running the ads or to alter them further.

What's more, AT&T has added a complaint about a newer Verizon commercial, which characterizes the iPhone as a new arrival to the Isles of Misfit Toys, to the lawsuit. The Isles of Misfit Toys refers to an island where broken toys and misfits would go in the popular Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer Christmas special.

In the ad, a toy elephant asks the iPhone what it's doing with the misfits, since it has so many cool apps. The iPhone doesn't really answer, instead flashing the AT&T map, which indicates the spotty 3G coverage. All the toys seem to understand.

AT&T hasn't launched ads of its own to combat the Verizon commercials. But the company's statement on its Web site is its attempt to refute many of Verizon's claims. For example, AT&T points out that its data coverage reaches 303 million people, or 97 percent of the U.S. population, using a mix of wireless technologies. Of course, AT&T admits that not all of these customers are able to access the faster 3G network; only 75 percent of the U.S. population can get access to AT&T's 3G wireless network.

AT&T also emphasizes in its statement that it has twice as many smartphone customers as Verizon. And it says it offers the most popular smarpthone in the industry, the Apple iPhone. AT&T says it offers more mobile applications than its competitors. And finally, it points out that it has the fastest 3G wireless network in the nation, a claim some customers who use the service may question.

There's no question that Verizon's ads are hard-hitting. But it's difficult to say whether they have affected consumers' purchase decisions. Anecdotally, it looks like the ads might have helped Verizon win a few customers. One Motorola Droid customer I interviewed at a Verizon store in New York this week said he decided not to buy the iPhone because of the Verizon ads he saw on TV.

"I was considering the iPhone," said Henry Goodison, of the Bronx borough. "But I saw a commercial about AT&T's 3G coverage. It said, 'Here is AT&T's 3G coverage, and here is ours.' And I thought it would be better to have Verizon, if I travel to another state, where AT&T doesn't have 3G coverage."

It was bound to happen. AT&T is suing Verizon Wireless over its "There's a Map for That" advertising campaign.

When I first saw the advertisements on TV, I thought for sure that AT&T or Apple would file a lawsuit claiming the advertisement was too similar to the iPhone's "There's an App for That" slogan.

I was right about one thing. AT&T is suing Verizon. But I was wrong about the reason behind the suit.

AT&T's beef isn't over the wording of the "There's a Map for That" slogan. Instead the company claims that Verizon is misleading customers into thinking that AT&T subscribers are not able to use their phones in areas where the carrier does not offer 3G wireless coverage.

In the suit that AT&T filed Tuesday in Atlanta federal court, AT&T describes how Verizon's ad campaign shows maps with white spaces, which it claims misleads consumers into thinking that AT&T has no wireless coverage in particular areas of the country.

But that is not the case. The white spaces actually indicate where AT&T does not have 3G wireless access. It doesn't indicate that AT&T has no wireless coverage. In fact, in most parts of the country, AT&T has a 2.5G Edge network.

AT&T doesn't dispute the fact that its 3G wireless service is not in every region of the country indicated on the map. But the company says that the advertisement makes consumers believe that AT&T has no service in those areas, which implies that subscribers can't use their phones at all in those regions.

"Contrary to the misleading message conveyed by Verizon's advertisements, AT&T customers can fully use their wireless devices outside of a '3G' coverage area and undisputedly have coverage in areas depicted by the white or blank spaces on the maps used in Verizon's advertisements," AT&T said in its complaint.

AT&T also asserts in its complaint that it is "losing incalculable market share, invaluable goodwill that it has spent billions of dollars to develop among consumers, and the significant investment it has made in its wireless network."

AT&T is not asking Verizon to stop its ad campaign entirely. And it's not asking its rival to change the wording of its advertising. What AT&T wants is for Verizon to stop showing maps of AT&T's 3G coverage areas that it claims mislead customers into thinking they can't use their phones in non-3G areas.

AT&T has asked for a temporary restraining order against Verizon so that it cannot benefit from the ads while the companies await a permanent injunction.

Verizon Wireless, which is owned jointly by Verizon Communications and Vodafone Group, said AT&T's suit is without merit. The company has said that the ads clearly state that voice and data services are available outside 3G areas.

"The ads are serving to inform customers where the coverage critical to operating a smartphone is available," said Brenda Raney, a Verizon Wireless spokeswoman. "Considering their limited 3G coverage, our competitor should examine whether they are misleading customers with their fastest 3G network claim."

Motorola Droid

(Credit: Motorola)

The hard-hitting advertising campaign and AT&T's lawsuit are just the latest signs that competition in the U.S. wireless market is reaching a fever pitch. More than 89 percent of Americans already subscribe to a cell phone service, according to the CTIA. This means that for wireless operators to grow, they must lure new subscribers from competitors.

Verizon Wireless and AT&T control the lion's share of the wireless market as the No.1 and No. 2 operators in the country, respectively. Sprint Nextel and T-Mobile USA are the other two main national carriers. Sprint has steadily been losing customers for several quarters. And T-Mobile has been unsuccessful in becoming a major threat to the big two operators.

As a result, the rivalry between the two largest wireless companies, Verizon and AT&T, is heating up. Verizon has historically had a very good reputation for having a reliable network with broad network coverage. But even with a strong network, the company has lacked cool phones, which consumers have complained about.

Meanwhile, AT&T's network has had a mediocre reputation at best, but the carrier is the exclusive wireless operator in the U.S. for Apple's iPhone. And despite the fact that subscribers have been complaining about poor service and spotty coverage on AT&T's network, new subscribers are still flocking to the carrier to buy the popular iPhone. In the third quarter, AT&T reported it had signed up a net of 2 million subscribers. Verizon signed up 1.2 million new subscribers for the same period.

But now Verizon is about to launch a phone that many analysts believe could give the iPhone a run for its money. The Motorola Droid, which uses Google's Android operating system, goes on sale Friday. And since the phone was revealed to analysts and product reviewers last week, it's been getting high marks.

Verizon's top marketing executive John Stratton said the ad campaign for the new Droid will be the biggest Verizon has ever launched. But he said that the company will focus more on what the Droid can do and less on what other devices or competitors cannot do. One thing is clear, the battle for wireless subscribers is likely to get nastier.

As a consumer, I hope this intense competition eventually leads to better services, cooler devices, and lower prices. But we'll just have to wait and see. Right now, it just looks like a war of words.

E-marketing firm SmartReply has acquired mobile-advertising specialist MSnap in an effort to increase its presence on wireless devices.

SmartReply, which distributes advertisements via voice messages, e-mail, and text messages, is seeking to create the largest U.S. mobile-messaging ad network through the acquisition, according to a post on MSnap's Web site.

Terms of the deal were not disclosed, and MSnap and SmartReply were not immediately available for comment, but according to a report in The Wall Street Journal, MSnap's shareholders will receive a minority stake in SmartReply.

MSnap, founded in 2006, has received investments from Partech International and First Round Capital.

The Journal, citing figures from investment bank Partech, noted that approximately 80 mobile-marketing companies have collectively raised more than $1.2 billion in venture funding since January 2006. During the same period, the Journal noted that 20 companies in the sector have been acquired for a total of roughly $900 million.

The advertising sector has seen a large pullback in the weakened economy, and industry analysts have pointed to small companies and nontraditional media companies as being the likely targets of mergers and acquisitions.

Greystripe announced Wednesday it raised $5.5 million in a third round of venture capital funding as it seeks to gain traction for its ad-supported mobile game advertising network.

Incubic Venture capital led the round, which included additional existing investors Monitor Ventures and Walt Disney Co.-backed Steamboat Ventures.

Greystripe has raised a total of $15.6 million to date, last raising a second round of $8.9 million in May 2007 and a $1.2 million first round in October 2006. The company declined to discuss whether its latest round was at a higher or lower valuation.

The start-up has developed technology designed to allow advertising agencies to click on a mobile option to extend their existing online advertising campaigns beyond computer screens or TV. Greystripe aims to take flash advertisement and extend it beyond its online format to a mobile format. Flash advertisements have predominantly appeared online, rather than on mobile devices.

Michael Chang, Greystripe chief executive, said in a statement:

For too long the mobile advertising world has built a silo approach to their business.

Those days are over. It's time to join the online advertising world and bring new value in terms of reach, targeting and interactivity.

Among the smartphones that Greystripe works with, it delivers rich media flash ads on Apple's iPhone.

MyScreen Mobile announced Thursday it is offering a version of its advertising rewards service for Google's Android smartphones.

Under the service, users sign up for MyScreen Mobile to receive targeted ads on their mobile phones. In exchange for viewing the full-screen ads, users receive rewards points for such subsidized mobile services as ringtones, mobile games, and gift cards.

MyScreen, which already has versions of its service for BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, Symbian, and Palm OS devices, is offering up a service that is akin to other Internet advertising incentive programs that have popped up over the years from the former AllAdvantage to the former CyberGold.

AdSense for mobile search lets others use Google's search engine, sharing the branding and the ad revenue.

(Credit: Google)

Continuing its effort to stake out turf in a fast-growing area, Google on Tuesday announced the ability of mobile phones to show Google-supplied advertisements through a program called AdSense for mobile search.

Google sells ads next to its own search results through a service called AdWords, but the newer development involves a separate service called AdSense that lets publishers show Google-administered ads on their own sites. Google launched AdSense for mobile phones in 2007, but now it's seeking testers for a hybrid offering that involves others using Google's own search engine.

With it, mobile phone makers or mobile network operators can use Google's search engine and search results, sharing in revenue that comes from the accompanying search ads, Yury Pinsky, product manager of Google's mobile team, said in a blog post Tuesday.

The search can be co-branded with others' Web sites, Google said, implying the company is willing to share but not to let its brand vanish altogether.

Google dominates search for computers, but the company and rivals such as Microsoft and Google are scrambling to stake claims in the mobile market, where increasingly sophisticated phones and networks now permit correspondingly better Web browsing. It's a major new area of growth for advertising companies.

AdMob put out a call Tuesday for Android developers, as it unveiled an ad unit specifically for applications running on Google's smartphone.

AdMob's ad unit is designed to allow third-party developers to generate revenue from the applications they create for Google's Android mobile phone. AccuWeather, Jirbo, and TapJoy developers have already put AdMob's Android ad unit to work, the company said.

"We are already seeing strong interest in developing applications for Android-based devices, similar to what we saw with the iPhone last summer," Ali Diab, AdMob vice president of product management, said in a statement.

AdMob, based in San Mateo, Calif., serves mobile banner and text ads. The company works with more than 6,000 mobile sites and 450 iPhone applications.