Whoa -- we just got word that AT&T is suing Verizon for false advertising over Big Red's "There's a map for that" ads. We're reading the complaint and motion to stop the ads right now, but here's what AT&T says is the big problem:

In essence, we believe the ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T doesn't offer ANY wireless service in the vast majority of the country. In fact, AT&T's wireless network blankets the US, reaching approximately 296M people. Additionally, our 3G service is available in over 9,600 cities and towns. Verizon's misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T's strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers... and we've beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn -- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive.

AT&T also says its network reaches about the same number of people as Verizon's, so we're thinking it's a little miffed that it's being portrayed as an also-ran here. We'll update as we learn more, keep it locked!

Update: So this seems like a very narrow lawsuit, actually. As we've been told, AT&T thinks Verizon is trying to fool viewers into thinking that they can't use any AT&T phone services outside of 3G coverage areas by showing two essentially different maps. Since Verizon's entire network is 3G, the gaps in the red map are actual service gaps -- but Verizon doesn't show that the gaps on the AT&T map might be covered by AT&T's huge 2G network. We can see how that could be misleading, but at some point you've got to compare apples to apples, and AT&T even says it has "no quarrel with Verizon advertising its larger 3G network" in its complaint, so we'll see how the court reacts.

Update 2: Interestingly, Verizon's already changed the ads once at AT&T's behest, editing them to remove the phrase "out of touch" and adding a "Voice and data services available outside of 3G areas" small print disclaimer at the end. Apparently that wasn't enough for AT&T, which says the ads still confuse non-technical viewers into thinking AT&T provides no service at all outside of its 3G coverage.

Update 3: Okay, we've read everything -- there's really not much more to this suit than the arguments over the maps. We're thinking Verizon could have easily dealt with this by just using dark blue and light blue on the AT&T map to differentiate between 3G and 2G coverage, but at this point we don't think Ma Bell is all that interested in anything except getting these ads off the air. All that said, it's hard to deny that Verizon's ads made a perfectly valid point: using an iPhone on AT&T's network in New York or San Francisco is an exercise in frustration, regardless of whether you have 2G or 3G, and we've had zero problems on Verizon. Let's just hope AT&T is working as hard to fight these ads with its actual service as it is with its lawyers.

In the latest major twist in this epic battle between wireless chipmakers, a US District Judge has slapped a permanent injunction on any products containing those Qualcomm 3G chips ruled to be infringing on Broadcom's so-called '686 patents. Not only can Qualcomm no longer offer infringing devices nor the chips themselves in the US, the retroactive nature of the ruling means that the company can't even provide service or technical support for '686 products already on the market. At this point, with a voluntary licensing agreement seemingly off the table, the next move for Qualcomm is establishing a plan of action to show Judge James Selna how it plans to redesign its products into compliance. [Warning: PDF link]

[Via Reuters]

Surprise! The German courts have reversed the November decision and now say that T-Mobile has the right to sell the iPhone exclusively in Germany. As a result, the injunction granted to Vodafone has been dismissed. T-Mobile still has the right to seek damages. Ah well, there are still unlocked iPhones in France if anyone's looking.

The gloves are off and the court date is set: T-Mobile faces off with arch rival Vodafone on November 29th in Germany. Will T-Mobile's exclusivity on the iPhone continue unabated or will Germany's other carriers (and their consumers) still not reap the benefits of an unlocked iPhone due to its prohibitively high, €999 cost? Tune in next week to find out.

Pssst, hey Germany... yeah you. Just in case T-Mobile wins and discontinues the unlocked offering, November 29th is the same date that your neighbors in France will start selling their iPhones. Chances are, an unlocked version will be sold too. Just saying is all.

You'll have to bear with us on this one folks as the news is a bit muffled crossing the Atlantic, language, and cultural divides, but UK-based Vodafone has reportedly received a restraining order against T-Mobile's iPhone sales in Germany. Vodafone's issue is the exclusivity contract with Apple and fee structure within T-Mobile's subscription offering. What's odd here is the language of the Dow Jones piece which claims that the Hamburg order, issued Monday is, "prohibiting the German telecommunications giant from selling Apple Inc.'s (AAPL) iPhone in Germany." That sounds like a full stop (pending appeal) of all iPhone sales in Germany. The Financial Times, however, says that the order "will not disrupt sales" as the Christmas purchases accelerate. Vodafone is framing their argument around customer choice while admitting that it's the revenue sharing model, and possibility that Nokia or Ericsson follow suit, which has prompted the legal action. At least they're not sticking their heads in the sand this time.

Update: Dow Jones has now clarified the situation. A Vodafone spokesman says, "The preliminary injunction filed in Hamburg doesn't mean Telekom will have to cease marketing the product immediately." Deutsche Telekom is the parent of T-Mobile Germany. He goes on to say, "We're not taking any plans to replicate these actions anywhere else, or in the U.K."

[Via Appleinsider]

Read -- Dow Jones
Read -- Deutsche Telekom (translated)
Read -- FT