LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 2:25 pm**

A federal judge in San Francisco ruled this month that a lawsuit filed against Target Corp. by the National Federation of the Blind challenging the accessibility of the retailer’s Web site can move forward.

NFB officials contended that the ruling sets a precedent, establishing that retailers must make their Web sites accessible to the blind under the federal Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).

“This ruling is a great victory for blind people throughout the country,” said NFB President Marc Maurer.

When asked if the NFB would file lawsuits against other retailers in an effort to improve Web site accessibility, NFB spokesman John Pare said, “You probably could imagine that we would.”

The lawsuit was filed a California Superior Court on Feb.7 as a class action on behalf of all blind Americans. The suit was moved to federal court a month later.

The NFB says the Target ruling sets a precedent.The plaintiffs in the case — the NFB, the National Federation of the Blind of California and blind college student Bruce Sexton — claimed that the Minneapolis-based retailer’s Web site, www.target.com, violates federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities.

Web Site Being Sued Under ADA For Discriminating Against The Blind:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=264030

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 2:43 pm**

Wow, I really don't get this one. How does one make a Website accessible to the blind? I take it there is home technology that allows blind people to use computers so how is it a particular retailer's responsibility to facilitate web usage for blind users?

I'm also more than a little surprised that Wal-Mart wasn't the target of this lawsuit.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 2:45 pm**

I didn't know that website in general were accesible to the blind. When will uslia.com be "viewable" to the vision-impared Sonny??!

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:12 pm**

When will uslia.com be "viewable" to the vision-impared Sonny??!

Yeah...better hurry before some of the refs start filing lawsuits! :lol:

I kid...I kid!!!

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:23 pm**

I am waiting for the dumb guy lawsuit-he sues IKEA for not bing able to understand the Swedish stick figures in the instructions. WTF!!!!!!!!!!

Haa to laugh about the article on the home page about the girl getting hit by the lacrosse ball-soon there will be warnings about not jumping off bridges or sticking your tongue in electical sockets-Darwin had it right with his theory of natural selection-let's keep it that way. Geeze this country really irks me sometimes.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:25 pm**

Then why don't you and the other pinko commies get out of my beautiful country! Geez, I hate liberals.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:29 pm**

I'm suing you for calling me a commie. Pinko is also a racist slur against Mexicans so I am getting LULAC after you! Your comments are casuing me emotional stress.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:53 pm**

PigPen wrote:I'm suing you for calling me a commie. Pinko is also a racist slur against Mexicans so I am getting LULAC after you! Your comments are casuing me emotional stress.

Don't forget that the administrators of the website allowed this harassment to go unpunished! US Lacrosse allowed for the creation of the MDIA which lead to this website, so they should be gone after too. Infact, just sue the entire internet. Im sure theyre responsible for it somehow. If you find a good lawyer, Im willing to smash a TV over my head then sue cause there wasn't a warning label for that specific action.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:57 pm**

Blind people use computers that have programs which read webpages out loud. Using things like Flash, Javascript, and other technologies that greatly enhance users' experiences are really detrimental to people who can't see. Even the layout of a page can affect how a reader interprets the page and reads it out loud.

There is a whole lot that goes into making a page, and the trend is to going towards CSS based pages. For more info, check out http://www.csszengarden.com - Without any formatting, their page looks like this: http://www.csszengarden.com/zengarden-sample.html but when you add a CSS page and some images, you can create any of the samples you see in the first link. A reader will read any sample page from the first link the same as the second link no matter the layout.

The thing that will probably happen will be that companies will create a link to a 'Visually Impaired Accessible' site rather than cater their main site the blind.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:35 pm**

StrykerFSU wrote:Wow, I really don't get this one. How does one make a Website accessible to the blind? I take it there is home technology that allows blind people to use computers so how is it a particular retailer's responsibility to facilitate web usage for blind users?

I'm also more than a little surprised that Wal-Mart wasn't the target of this lawsuit.

There are two websites that may explain a little bit how a website can be accessible to totally blind and legally blind people:

http://www.cast.org

http://www.section508.gov

The first link mentioned above will have this icon called "Bobby approved." That is usually found on some websites including one I know at Texas A&M University (its disabilities office).

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:48 pm**

Blind people use computers that have programs which read webpages out loud. Using things like Flash, Javascript, and other technologies that greatly enhance users' experiences are really detrimental to people who can't see. Even the layout of a page can affect how a reader interprets the page and reads it out loud.

leave it to Oakley to get the thread back to seriousness.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:00 pm**

Thanks for the information guys.

Posted: **Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:08 am**

UofMLaxGoalie11 wrote:
PigPen wrote:I'm suing you for calling me a commie. Pinko is also a racist slur against Mexicans so I am getting LULAC after you! Your comments are casuing me emotional stress.

Don't forget that the administrators of the website allowed this harassment to go unpunished! US Lacrosse allowed for the creation of the MDIA which lead to this website, so they should be gone after too. Infact, just sue the entire internet. Im sure theyre responsible for it somehow. If you find a good lawyer, Im willing to smash a TV over my head then sue cause there wasn't a warning label for that specific action.

Don't forget to sue Al Gore. After all, he invented the internet.

Posted: **Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:45 am**

This is pretty interesting stuff.

Good to have a functional justice system, where questions like this can be sorted out.

I think the question is as follows.

Does a website have the same obligation as a brick and mortar store with regards to accessability.

I'm assuming techincal limitations are the cause, and target's content does not meet the requirements of the software that translates visual data to audio data?

Posted: **Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:52 pm**

There is a free online service that lets you test single pages of web content for quality, accessibility, and privacy issues. I am quoting that from http://webxact.watchfire.com This site is apparently part of Watchfire.com.

There is a May 20, 2003 press release sent out by Watchfire about Texas A&M:

http://www.watchfire.com/news/releases/5-20-03.aspx

In addition to Texas A&M's web accessibility, you can check out its accessibility policy at:

http://webaccess.tamu.edu

That is to give you an idea of what and how Texas A&M checks and scans its websites for accessibility.

LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

Outrage of the Day

Outrage of the Day