Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones

Submission + - AT&T sues Verizon over TV ads (networkworld.com)

An anonymous reader writes: "Through the use of a coverage map in [Verizon] ads, they suggest through all white or blank space, not only that AT&T doesn't offer 3G coverage but no coverage at all," spokesman Mark Siegel said in an interview. "That's misleading and that's why we filed the lawsuit." In response, Verizon Wireless spokeswoman Brenda Raney said: "We feel the maps are accurate ... we make sure they are accurate." She said the TV ads clearly indicate in text that appears on the screen that the white areas are places where there is no 3G coverage, and not that there is no coverage at all.

Comment Re:Well Good (Score 1) 174

And where are they seeking them? Social media marketing isn't that hard, and is insanely cheap compared to billboards and the like. Advertising on Mininova, Pirate Bay and other torrent sites is cheap. Getting in on Pandora and MySpace music players would be the best, finding people who want cheap or free but aren't tech-savvy enough for bittorrent. Advertise a free exclusive track for signing up for the trial, it's not that difficult to make people spend money -- it feels good after all. They can't compete with free if they're not actually trying. I think could succeed if they made torrents part of their business model instead of a quick test. Also, that crap on the side (concert tickets, T-shirts, buttons, etc.) actually goes to the band. Ask any recording artist, the bulk of their money comes from tours and crap sales.

Comment Well Good (Score 1) 174

Well good, I can keep pirating music without feeling bad. But seriously, if the record companies caught on to the fact that people downloading music are doing so because they love music, not because they hate the industry, they could be making a lot of money. Lets say Atlantic records got their own paid torrent tracker and charged $20 a month to download albums at will. There would still be the super leeches taking 10-15 albums a month and after the first download it would be loose for everyone. But I know plenty of people that would pay the $20 a month, get two or three albums a month just because it's easier than navigating the spam and virus party that is bittorrent. When it becomes easier to buy music than steal it, people will actually buy it. But when I can get just about any album days, even months, before they are released in a matter of minutes, why would I go to the store which may or may not have it in stock even weeks after the release date. Until the record companies start seeking listeners where they live, they are going to keep floundering. Just look at iTunes, it took the record companies too long to figure out that people would actually pay the same amount for something that costs half what it does to produce a packaged album. Now some have and -- gadzooks -- people are actually buying more legal digital music. It'll be the same with torrents, hell, smart pirates are already charging for community-driven trackers and take requests for new content. Until then, I'll keep stealing music and spending that money on concert tickets and T-shirts. That way I'm actually giving money to all the actual band members in the bands that I never would have found browsing the local record store.

Slashdot Top Deals

Are you having fun yet?

Working...