Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AT&T Arbitration Clause Ruled Unconscionable

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the new-contracts-just-ask-to-surrender-all-rights dept.

Tech.Luver writes to tell us the Consumerist is reporting that a small clause in AT&T contracts has been ruled "unconscionable" by the 9th circuit court of appeals. The clause in question stated that if you use AT&T service you surrender your right to class action lawsuits and instead have to participate in mandatory binding arbitration.

5 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. You know what's unconscionable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Cory Doctorow's stupid, stupid haircut.

    1. Re:You know what's unconscionable? by poopdeville · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Admit it, you've got a huge boner for this Cory Doctorow fellow.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
  2. Re:URL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    No link? You must be new here. No one reads the fucking article!

    AC Sig for Cowards:
    --
    Madonna > *
  3. Nice troll! by StarKruzr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Got a lot of bites with this one.

    --

    +++ATH0
  4. Re:all fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Homophobia?

    I'm the person who posted that message. I am male. And it just so happens that I suck cock now and then. I'd do it more if I got more chances. One of the ways I get the chances I do get is to make no secret of it.

    I do not, however, do it as a way of buttering up my "betters" in a boardroom somewhere. I do it for fun, out of my own choice.

    "Cocksmoking" in this context is a metaphor for toadying, and the gender of the participants matters not at all. How did you even know that I, or the other AC to whom I was responding, was male in the first place?