Court Rules Against AT&T's Service Agreement

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is running a story about a recent ruling from the Washington State Supreme Court, which decided that AT&T's service agreement was not capable of waiving a customer's right to file a lawsuit against the company. The full opinion (PDF) is also available. From the conclusion: "AT&T's Consumer Services Agreement is substantively unconscionable and therefore unenforceable to the extent that it purports to waive the right to class actions, require confidentiality, shorten the Washington Consumer Protection Act statute of limitations, and limit availability of attorney fees. ... Courts will not be easily deceived by attempts to unilaterally strip away consumer protections and remedies by efforts to cloak the waiver of important rights under an arbitration clause."

Comments

Re:Right to Contract

[nomadic]

Arbitration was designed to be used between businesses; when it's done that way it can actually be a superior alternative to court. It's when it's applied to adhesion contracts with consumers that it get unfair.