Pennsylvania law governs this agreement, and any court proceedings (if not arbitrated) must be filed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, regardless of where you live.
This analysis describes what Comcast's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
If a dispute is not resolved through arbitration, the agreement requires you to pursue it in courts located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which could be a practical barrier for subscribers located in other states.
Interpretive note: Enforceability of the Pennsylvania forum selection clause for non-Pennsylvania residents may be limited by applicable state consumer protection laws; the practical effect of this clause is reduced by the mandatory arbitration provision for most consumer disputes.
The updated terms now explicitly prohibit the deployment of AI Agents to access, use, interact with, or take action on Comcast services unless Comcast expressly grants permission. This includes automated activities such as obtaining information, making requests, monitoring activity, copying, downloading, scraping, or data mining the services. The agreement also prohibits AI Agents from accepting terms on a user's behalf or engaging in support or sales interactions. Users who currently use automation tools or third-party integrations with Comcast services may need to seek express permission from Comcast or discontinue such automated access.
View change record →Previous version was a bare provision name with medium severity; current version specifies Pennsylvania law, Philadelphia courts, and explicitly subjects court jurisdiction to arbitration primacy, with severity reduced to low.
View full change record →Subscribers outside Pennsylvania who have a court-eligible dispute with Comcast would need to litigate in Philadelphia courts under Pennsylvania law, which could make pursuing smaller claims practically and financially difficult.
How other platforms handle this
These Terms shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law rules, and the federal laws of the United States. Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California...
These Terms of Service and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with them or their subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to any choice o...
These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law provisions. Any disputes not subject to arbitration will be resolved in the state or federal courts located in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Monitoring
Comcast has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, without giving effect to conflict of laws principles. To the extent that any action proceeds in court rather than arbitration, you consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.— Excerpt from Comcast's Comcast Terms of Service
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Forum selection clauses in consumer contracts are enforceable under federal and most state law but are subject to challenge where they are found to be unreasonably burdensome or contrary to strong state public policy. California and several other states have statutes or court decisions limiting the enforceability of out-of-state forum selection clauses in consumer contracts where the effect would be to deprive consumers of the protections of their home state's laws. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Low to Medium. Given the mandatory arbitration clause, forum selection provisions have limited practical scope for most consumer disputes. However, for matters that proceed in court (such as injunctive relief claims or cases where arbitration is found unenforceable), the Philadelphia forum requirement could create practical access-to-justice barriers for consumers in distant states. JURISDICTION FLAGS: California, New York, and other states with consumer protection provisions that may limit out-of-state forum selection clauses in consumer contracts create heightened exposure for enforceability challenges. California courts have on occasion declined to enforce forum selection clauses in consumer contracts where California residents would lose access to California consumer protection remedies. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Organizations reviewing this agreement for business purposes should note that the forum selection clause applies specifically to residential accounts; commercial service agreements may have different governing law and forum provisions. Legal teams should confirm whether Pennsylvania law's application to a particular dispute could affect the availability of state-specific consumer protection remedies. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: The Pennsylvania governing law provision should be evaluated in the context of applicable state consumer protection laws in states where Comcast operates; some state laws may apply mandatorily regardless of contractual choice-of-law clauses.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
If a dispute is not resolved through arbitration, the agreement requires you to pursue it in courts located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which could be a practical barrier for subscribers located in other states.
Subscribers outside Pennsylvania who have a court-eligible dispute with Comcast would need to litigate in Philadelphia courts under Pennsylvania law, which could make pursuing smaller claims practically and financially difficult.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 3 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Comcast.