said by 40757180: It's simple, they agree to such contract. They are not forced to get service from at&t and many do not. Same thing with other company, you're not forced to sign contract with them. So why should such language be illegal in the contract?
There are those things called unsconcionable rights, if I recall. One cannot sell himself into slavery, no matter what the corporate crooks want you to believe.
Or is it ok for me to have a few slaves to work my garden and slave girls to keep me entertained just because I tricked them into signing some paper and that paper says that my buddy John will be the "arbitrator" of any dispute ? The laws against slavery should not apply on my land since we have this "agreement" between "willing" parties, right ?
So should be the right to sue. "Parallel" orgs accountable to only crooks exist, as "arbitrators" or homeowners associations that erode the rights of duly elected governments and citizens.