Posted on 01/08/2018 5:42:50 AM PST by simpson96
A blind Manhattan woman recently filed individual lawsuits against more than 30 businesses she says are not handicap accessible online.
Maria Mendizabal, who is legally blind, claims that the Web sites for companies such as Nike, 24 Hour Fitness, De Beers, Barney’s, Donna Karan, and Kleinfeld Bridal aren’t compatible with screen-reading software that translates the written content into either audio or Braille.
“Unless websites are designed to be read by screen-reading software, blind and visually-impaired persons are unable to fully access websites, and the information, Products, and services contained thereon,” reads the suit against Barney’s, which is filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
While Mendizabal has lodged some 34 lawsuits, another disabled Manhattan man, Victor Lopez, has filed 21 against companies such as Bergdorf Goodman, Neiman Marcus, Swarovski, and B&H Photo.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Nope—which is why we generally very much don’t like nepotism in government.
We have been fortunate to avoid this to a far larger degree than other countries (nepotism) but...we are seeing more inroads into it.
It sounds to me like just another example of government over-reach when they enact laws about things the market should be allowed to decide. Companies which wish to do business with vision-impaired individuals will spend the time and effort to make their web-sites accessible - those who do not, will not and they may lose vision-impaired clientele to the businesses that have.
As far as I am concerned, I don't have a constitutional right to shop at a particular store, and neither does anyone else.
Access to government web sites? Different story.
Sorry but its reprehensible.
These aren’t mom and pop websites selling their home made goods on ETSY... these are Billion dollar corporations responsible for millions of peoples finances or medical care.
It is inexcusable and reprehensible, no excuse for it other than laziness and priorities that are not in the best interest of their members or customers.
Every single time they wind up getting their arses properly handed to them, because decide to make a short sighted (no pun intended) and stupid decision to skirt their moral and ethical obligations, let alone the law.
Which one of those corporations is responsible for your finances and/or health care?
Furthermore, what law requires you to deal with a particular financial advisor or health care provider.
You are acting like an anti-capitalist, big-government, liberal.
I am talking directly about companies I work with that I have had this conversation with, as I made quite clear in my original post. Take your ideological blinders off!
I have had this conversation with multiple companies over the years, and they always stupidly decide to skirt the law, when it is mentioned they need to do this, and they choose not to, only to get in trouble later and have to spend a lot more to fix it because they stupidly decide not to originally.
As to these companies, they are all big companies that I am sure were told by someone like me that they need to do this, and they chose not to... Now they will pay the price for not doing it and have to spend far more than they should have to fix it because they ignored the great advice they were given up front.. .that would have not only saved them a lawsuit and the payouts they will pay for it, but also the added expense of how much more it costs to FIX something that should have easily been built properly in the first place.
I am not an anti capitalist, because I advocate that capitalists must follow the law... These laws have been on the books for decades, these companies (and this list here are companies that are not small mom and pops but large corps who knew they were violating the law) these companies foolishly decided they were above the law and will now pay the price for it.
Their shareholders should be demanding heads for this.. they will wind up paying out millions most likely for something that should have never happened. Managerial incompetence.
A handful of lazy companies who can't bother to insert common language detection and image recognition software? And because of that people can ride into court and sue?
The problem isn't the web, it's their browsers. I'm honestly surprised that Google hasn't cooked up a solution to destroy all of them. Might take them a couple weeks to put it all together.
Saw one today, ADA compliant sidewalk, 150 ft long, 3 miles from the nearest intersection, but by golly there's a ramp at each end with the little dots. County put it in because it was free grant money and replaced an 8" asphalt berm that had deteriorated.
I’ve been waiting for this. 508 Compliance is a big deal and nearly nobody does it.
Any web designer worth his salt would know that any public facing website has to accommodate blind users, and if accounted for upfront, doesn’t cost all that much to implement.
But most web designers learned from a “Dummies” book.
She should sue Stevie Wonder for being more successful than she must be.
And to think, somehow, Helen Keller became successful without suing the crap out of people.
+1
She should sue some transplant surgeons for not stepping up immediately to provide her with new corneas, lenses, entire eyeballs or whatever.
And Blind people buy shoes too, why would you not try to accommodate that market? It’s just bad business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.