Cutting to the chase: --

The purpose of a corporation like Sprint is to make profits for its shareholders. Much as some people might wish it so, its purpose is not to be a paragon of ethics.

If you don't like that fact, your options are as follows:

1) Shun it, hoping it will go out of business
2) Purchase or otherwise garner a controlling interest (e.g. proxy battle). You may then direct the corporation as you see fit
3) Try to persuade the corporate executive to see things your way
4) Apply legal pressure within the existing legal framework
5) Modify the legal framework to make the "undesirable" behaviour illegal or uneconomic
6) Try to persuade others to partake of 1, 2, 3, 4 and/or 5 along with you to multiply your influence

What you've shown so far:

1) Full marks! OTOH, if Sprint does go out of business a lot more people will be out of work.
2) Unknown. Have you bought any shares and/or attended an AGM?
3) Unknown. Have you corresponded with the Sprint executive to let them know why you're boycotting them? Or, are they just going to go out of business without ever knowing why?
4) Unknown. I haven't heard anything about a class-action suit by the "Victims of Sprint". Any plans in the works?
5) Unknown. If you're not an elected official there's probably not much you can do here. Maybe you could persuade others to elect you.

6) This is the biggie. If you want other people to help you with any of the above, you need to persuade them. It helps a lot if you can offer facts and evidence. Insulting them and/or failing to respect their right to hold a contrary opinion is not persuasive. Evading direct questions is not persuasive.

In the final analysis, if you don't care enough to try to do a good job of persuasion, why did you start this thread in the first place?