Zellerbach's reasoning is simple: Verizon's "There's a Map for That" ads are doing "a world of hurt" to AT&T and the company needs to take whatever steps it can to get them off the air.

"I think they're very effective ads," says Zellerbach, who is a partner at the Silicon Valley branch of Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe. "[AT&T is] now getting beat up by people in the press and by other people over how poor their system seems to be."

Given the stakes for AT&T, Zellerbach doesn't think this qualifies as a frivolous false-advertising suit. However, he does think that AT&T has a very steep hill to climb if they're going come out of the suit successful. For one thing, he notes that the company is not challenging the accuracy of the 3G coverage maps showing that Verizon's 3G network covers vastly more geographical area in the United States than does AT&T's. Second, he notes that Verizon very clearly labels the maps as "AT&T 3G Coverage" and "Verizon Wireless 3G Coverage."

The only shot AT&T has, Zellerbach says, is to make a convincing argument that the average consumer doesn't know the difference between 3G data coverage and standard wireless cellular coverage. In other words, AT&T will have to demonstrate that the ads give consumers the impression that AT&T lacks any sort of wireless coverage throughout vast swathes of the United States.