> 5G Evolution and the 5GE indicator simply let customers know when their device is in an area where speeds up to twice as fast as standard LTE are available.
Ya, but customers don't know that. They think it's 5g. It's not 5g. This wouldn't have been an issue if there was help text/a tooltip in cellular settings with a disclaimer saying what 5ge is.
They did the same thing with 4g. I had friends in high school with HSPA+ phones and they suddenly got an update to '4g'. Total lies, it was like 3mbit speedtests. Then we got real LTE and it was an order of magnitude faster.
You mean the one that had to tell people their “3G” phones wouldn’t work anymore when they turned off their 2G network because the early “3G” phones weren’t?
Not the first time they've done this: At least on AT&T iPhones, 3G+HSDPA is misleadingly indicated as "4G" on the status bar ("true" 4G is indicated as "LTE").
T-Mobile followed suit on that as well, back when they were itching to merge with AT&T. They even went so far as to brand Samsung's Galaxy S Relay as "4G" even though it was at best dual carrier HSPA+.
But the crew in charge of T-Mobile at the time also decided not to bother investing in their network, so back in 2013 T-Mobile US's coverage was absolute shite outside of cities.
It just goes to show that marketing weasels and lobbyists, as always, will happily use tech-speak to bamboozle the masses - and the politicians and regulators as well.
If only we had a regulatory body capable of preventing telecom companies from engaging in this kind of anti-consumer chicanery. I don't think most people really care about the actual distinctions of 4g vs 5g but it's certainly wrong to advertise something as better than the service you actually provide and questionably legal
I understand why Sprint is doing this but I question how legitimate their claim is. The vast majority of folks don't understand (or care) about the underlying technology beyond "5G is one better, right?"
If there are customers who bought the AT&T service because they thought they were getting authentic 5G then there would be better standing for fraud but I'm sure there's plenty of fine print saying that "5G" as advertised -- even "5GE" -- has nothing to do with the technology called 5G by the ITU (or whomever is certifying what authentic 5G is).
The red bull one was settled out of court, wasn't it? Also, I almost feel like the red bull lawsuit is the same deal as the McDonald's coffee one - legitimate complaints being marginalized and derided as obvious issues (humans can't have wings, coffee hot).
The red bull suit argued that with the 'gives you wings' slogan and other advertising, they suggested it's better than, say, a cup of coffee... but there's less caffeine in red bull than coffee, and not a whole lot else in terms of stimulants. Whether that's enough to be really false advertising, I'm not sure, but characterizing the lawsuit as being about just the slogan and actual wings isn't accurate.
The Verge did a good interview with the Sprint lawyer in this case. https://castro.fm/episode/ZPzYca They have studies that show consumers are confused.
21 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 26.1 ms ] thread> 5G Evolution and the 5GE indicator simply let customers know when their device is in an area where speeds up to twice as fast as standard LTE are available.
Ya, but customers don't know that. They think it's 5g. It's not 5g. This wouldn't have been an issue if there was help text/a tooltip in cellular settings with a disclaimer saying what 5ge is.
So yeah.
If your goal is to intentionally mislead customers, ATT did accomplish.
Yes.
But the crew in charge of T-Mobile at the time also decided not to bother investing in their network, so back in 2013 T-Mobile US's coverage was absolute shite outside of cities.
It just goes to show that marketing weasels and lobbyists, as always, will happily use tech-speak to bamboozle the masses - and the politicians and regulators as well.
Of course in our current “business” environment, such an entity would likely be eventually co-opted and captured by the very industry they regulate.
If there are customers who bought the AT&T service because they thought they were getting authentic 5G then there would be better standing for fraud but I'm sure there's plenty of fine print saying that "5G" as advertised -- even "5GE" -- has nothing to do with the technology called 5G by the ITU (or whomever is certifying what authentic 5G is).
Does there have to be? I mean, "5GE" is borderline false advertisement. Let a judge decide if this is harming competitors.
Except it depends on the judge, $$$ lawyers, etc. so...
The red bull suit argued that with the 'gives you wings' slogan and other advertising, they suggested it's better than, say, a cup of coffee... but there's less caffeine in red bull than coffee, and not a whole lot else in terms of stimulants. Whether that's enough to be really false advertising, I'm not sure, but characterizing the lawsuit as being about just the slogan and actual wings isn't accurate.