Telstra drops appeal on 'misleading' Next G claims

Telstra has withdrawn its appeal against a Court ruling which found that it engaged in "misleading" and "illegal" conduct in its Next G advertising, following a decision by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) which disputed claims about the coverage of the network.

The ruling was handed down by the Federal Court in December last year after the consumer watchdog initiated legal proceedings against the telco in September 2007 alleging that advertising taglines for its Next G handsets — such as "Everywhere you need it" — gave consumers the false impression that total coverage across Australia was available.

"Telstra's decision to discontinue its appeal proceedings brings a welcome end to this matter, and vindicates the ACCC's intervention to protect consumers from misleading marketing in the telecommunications industry," said ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel in a statement.

Despite having withdrawn its appeal over the ruling, a Telstra spokesperson said today that it had done "more than any other mobile phone provider to properly inform our customers of how to get the most from the Next G network".

"Our position on the outcome of the case has not changed and we continue to stand behind our network and the advertising. However, as the campaign in question has not run for over 10 months and is a distant memory, the CDMA network is now closed ... it is in the best interest of our shareholders and taxpayers to bring the episode to a close," said the spokesperson.

Michael Cosgrave, ACCC group general manager for communications told ZDNet.com.au that the regulator was "very satisfied" with the outcome now that Telstra had withdrawn its appeal against the findings.

"The appeal was due to be heard in a couple of weeks, and the legal wheels were all in motion ... but then they [Telstra] determined to withdraw their appeal, which clearly we [ACCC] thought was of little merit anyway," he said.

"We initiated the action in the first place because we were concerned that consumers may be purchasing handsets under the false belief that they had coverage everywhere in Australia, and it was essential to correct that misapprehension," said Cosgrave.

Telstra must now cover the ACCC's costs over the course of the appeal and last year's initial legal proceedings.

Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!

Advertisement

Talkback 4 comments

  1. Advertising - parity in prosecution M@TT -- 08/05/08

    mmmm so when a large hamburger chain advertises their product with photographs that don't even come close to the appearance of the delivered item - nobody cares.

    1. Hamburglar Lord Watchdog -- 08/05/08

      I care and I do the right thing by my stomach and not buy the garbage. I do the same with telecommunications.

    2. How about this? Nigel Harrison -- 08/05/08

      When this hit the news last year I lodged a complaint with the ACCC about Toshiba that had street, newspaper and internet advertising that claimed "weighs nothing, does everything" and to date I have not even had any reply from the ACCC. As I suspected the ACCC have still not acknowledged my complaint and I doubt if they ever will do so. This proves to me that the ACCC has Telstra in their sights and do not truly care about what is in the consumer's best interests and no matter what the high court rules about the strict letter of the law nothing will convince me otherwise.

  2. Everyone is doing it... Anonymous -- 08/05/08

    Interestingly, I constantly receive advertising material from a Telstra competitor stating "get online anywhere" with their wireless broadband solution. Everybody uses language like "everywhere", "the best", "the fastest" - they are just marketing slogans, not fact - I dont need protection from the ACCC to spell out the obvious....if i really thought Next G would work "everywhere i need it" I shouldnt be allowed to view any ads in print, on the radio or on TV. I think these court cases are a waste of time and money - Are "the burgars are better at hungry jacks".... I don't think so. Maybe the ACCC could waste time taking Hungry Jacks to court because some people think KFC burgars taste better?

Add your opinion


Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Renai LeMay MyPerfect.com.au has potential
    Victorian Web start-up My Perfect has a strong story and rationale for why it will succeed. But it has to overcome some challenges and design flaws first.
  • Array Storage infrastructure on the tender track
    For a large-scale storage project, it's not uncommon to go out to tender for the best deal — but when was the last time you had to put together a tender for a document management room?
  • Array Apple has killed the video store; will ISPs be next?
    The Olympics are nearly over, and the Australian team deserves kudos for an excellent performance all around. Yet even as the Olympic sun sets on the Bird's Nest for the last time this weekend, millions of spectators around the world will be scanning their dials in the hope of finding something else to fill their viewing hours.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured