Well, I thought it was a bit silly from the start and it seems that a Federal Judge may be in agreement.

The lawsuit filed by DirecTV against DISH Network was a result of DirecTV’s reported belief that the ads were misleading. U.S. District Judge Paul Crotty denied DirecTV’s request for a temporary restraining order that would have halted the advertisements that DirecTV did not like.

Apparently, the judge left the door open for DirecTV to renew their request and better explain what exactly it is about the “Why Pay More?” ads that has DirecTV execs crying foul.

I would think that instead of running to court like a little kid running to mommy after skinning his knee, DirecTV would just come up with some ads of their own that even the score with DISH Network. That seems to be the way it usually goes. My earlier example of how Verizon and AT&T have been ripping each other to shreds is something that I think consumers are accustomed to.

As you might expect, company lawyers presented their cases in court and for now at least, DirecTV was told to pick up all their toys and go home. Perhaps they’ll prepare a better case, or if they smarten up, hire an advertising agency to come up with some ads that target DISH Network.

It’s nice to see a little common sense come from a case like this. It would be nice to see more silly lawsuits get thrown out like this, even if it is just for the time being.

This is one of those stories that makes you say: “Huh?”

It’s being reported that DirecTV, the largest satellite TV provider in the country, is suing DISH Network for “false advertising.”

It’s all due to some commercial advertisements that DISH Network has been using that claim they are offering the same programming that DirecTV does for $24 less per month. At least that’s what the suit claims. The DISH ads feature a slogan that asks, “Why pay more?”

I’m a little surprised by this news, since I constantly see competing advertisements on TV for various products and services that tell completely different stories. An excellent example would be the latest Verizon Wireless vs.. AT&T commercials.

If I am not mistaken, Verizon started the battle by featuring a map of their wireless coverage compared to AT&T’s, which, if the Verizon ads were to be believed, looked pretty pathetic compared to how they depicted their own network.

It didn’t take AT&T too long to fire back, claiming that their wireless network was much better than Verizon was claiming, and if course, while they were at it, they declared that AT&T’s wireless network was better.

Well, obviously someone is not telling the truth. These two companies are tearing each other up with claims that are completely contradictory, yet I am not hearing any reports of AT&T suing Verizon or vice versa.

As far back as I can remember, competing companies have used advertising that oftentimes shed a rather unflattering light on on another, but I don’t think they spent a lot of time suing each other. It seemed that was just the way the advertising game was played.

It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.