jet@karazm.math.uh.edu (J. Eric Townsend) (09/17/90)
In a propaganda class the other day, we were watching an episode of Nightline. It was full of Sprint's "Lighten up, AT&T" series of adverts. My question is this: Could AT&T, if it wanted, decide to attack carrier X? ie: "Carrier X says they give you better prices, but it's not true. AT&T is much cheaper." Or are they somehow legally required to say: "Some other carriers say they give you better prices, but it's not true."? J. Eric Townsend -- University of Houston Dept. of Mathematics (713) 749-2120 Internet: jet@uh.edu Bitnet: jet@UHOU Skate UNIX(r) [Moderator's Note: Although most successful advertising consists of positive statements about one's own products rather than negative comments directed to one's competition, there is no law they cannot advertise their competitor's shortcomings if they wish to do so, naming those shortcomings specifically; libelous and slanderous statements excluded, of course. Please note also the courts have ruled there is a big difference between 'free speech' when citizens speak it, and 'commercial speech'. Some fine points of law might apply. Inquire in misc.legal. PAT]
PZ2@psuvm.psu.edu (David L. Phillips) (09/17/90)
In article <12225@accuvax.nwu.edu>, jet@karazm.math.uh.edu (J. Eric Townsend) says: >My question is this: Could AT&T, if it wanted, decide to attack >carrier X? ie: "Carrier X says they give you better prices, but it's >not true. AT&T is much cheaper." Or are they somehow legally >required to say: "Some other carriers say they give you better prices, >but it's not true."? As Pat pointed out, there is no reason AT&T can't name competitors, so long as what they say about them is true. In fact, AT&T IS making specific comparisons with MCI. ("Where's your big savings??")
mingo@uunet.uu.net (Charles Hawkins Mingo) (09/21/90)
The Moderator writes: >[Moderator's Note: Although most successful advertising consists of >positive statements about one's own products rather than negative >comments directed to one's competition, there is no law they cannot >advertise their competitor's shortcomings if they wish to do so, >naming those shortcomings specifically; libelous and slanderous >statements excluded, of course. Actually, making misleading claims about the competition is considered "unfair competition" and is regulated by the Federal Trade Commission. It's not necessary that your claim be false, and the burden of proving truth is on the advertiser. Hence the reluctance to make generalizations about anything hard to document (such as line quality or operator service). Price is about the only thing they can easily prove. This sort of negative advertising is very common where generic goods are being sold (such as Tylenol, Anacin, etc.), and there isn't much to compare. The FTC has been chasing those giys for years. Charlie Mingo Internet: mingo@well.sf.ca.us 2209 Washington Circle #2 CI$: 71340,2152 Washington, DC 20037 AT&T: 202/785-2089