This California class-action is a case to watch.
It is determining the extent to which commercial websites must be designed to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities and the civil penalties against a company that fails to do so:
SAN FRANCISCO--LAWFUEL - The Legal Newswire - A federal district court judge issued two landmark decisions today in a nationwide class action against Target Corporation. First, the court certified the case as a class action on behalf of blind Internet users throughout the country under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Second, the court held that Web sites such as target.com are required by California law to be accessible.
The President of the National Federation of the Blind, Dr. Marc Maurer, commented on the court’s ruling: “This is a tremendous step forward for blind people throughout the country who for too long have been denied equal access to the Internet economy. All e-commerce businesses should take note of this decision and immediately take steps to open their doors to the blind.”
Larry Paradis of Disability Rights Advocates, one of the lead counsel for the class, commented on the court’s decision: “Target Corporation has led a battle against blind consumers in a key area of modern life: the Internet economy. The court’s decision today makes clear that people with disabilities no longer can be treated as second-class citizens in any sphere of mainstream life. This ruling will benefit hundreds of thousands of Americans with disabilities.”
The ruling was issued in a case brought by the National Federation of the Blind (NFB). The suit charges that Target failed and refused to make its Web site (www.target.com) accessible to the blind and, therefore, violated the ADA as well as two California civil rights statutes: the California Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Disabled Persons Act.
The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to certify a nationwide class under the ADA for injunctive relief. The court also granted the plaintiffs’ motion to certify a California subclass for both injunctive relief and statutory minimum damages. The court denied Target’s motion for summary judgment.
This issue is quite new to me. Wikipedia has a good primer on the fundamentals of website accessibility:
Web accessibility refers to the practice of making websites usable by people of all abilities and disabilities. When sites are correctly designed, developed and edited, all users can have equal access to information and functionality. For example, when a site is coded with semantically meaningful HTML, with textual equivalents provided for images and with links named meaningfully, this helps blind users using text-to-speech software and/or text-to-Braille hardware. When text and images are large and/or enlargable, it is easier for users with poor sight to read and understand the content. When links are underlined (or otherwise differentiated) as well as coloured, this ensures that colour blind users will be able to notice them. When clickable links and areas are large, this helps users who cannot control a mouse with precision. When pages are coded so that users can navigate by means of the keyboard alone, or a single switch access device alone, this helps users who cannot use a mouse or even a standard keyboard. When videos are closed captioned or a sign language version is available, deaf and hard of hearing users can understand video. When flashing effects are avoided or made optional, users prone to seizures caused by these effects are not put at risk. And when content is written in plain language and illustrated with instructional diagrams and animations, users with dyslexia and learning difficulties are better able to understand the content. When sites are correctly built and maintained, all of these users can be accommodated while not impacting on the usability of the site for non-disabled users.
For more background on website accessibility see The Challenges of Web Accessibility and How to Make Your Blog Accessible to Blind Readers from the American Foundation for the Blind. Here are a few hints from the blog accessibility article:
One can learn quite a bit researching and writing a blog.
I have been guilty of a few of those accessibility sins. Now I know.
I'll try to do better.
But as Walter Olsen pointed out in a 2000 article, achieving full, Web accessibility can be an extremely daunting task for do-it-yourself web programmers and professionals alike.
This is particularly true as new and increasingly complex web applications and widgets come into mainstream use. These "plug and play" modules, such as this blog's Web Watch, are developed by third party programmers like Google and added to websites via simple coding supplied by the developers.
Most of us simply don't know enough about the back-end of these features to even contemplate their accesibility implications.
- Garry J. Wise, Toronto
Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net
EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE
No comments:
Post a Comment