Find us elsewhere
Join Now Member Login

Americans with Disabilities Act

 
New Topic
Post Reply
Follow Topic
« Prev Page of 22 Next »
  • Author
  • Message
 
CraigL

posts: 9051

Mar 24, 2007 6:51 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
LOL! I can see it now...the SWAT team rolls up, everyone jumps out the back, there`s lots of  "Hut! Hut! Hut!" and yelling and shouting.

Then they stop. They can`t get into the building because it doesn`t have a ramp!


patentandtrademark

posts: 1332

Mar 24, 2007 7:12 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

That`s got Monty Python written all over it.  When they can`t storm the building with no ramp, the ADA SWAT team then begins to angrily attempt to penetrate the evil fortress by sending nasty text messages to the evil empire inside the building.  But alas, the messages also can`t break through because the business does not meet ADA compliant text message standards either!

Then, the door to the building opens and a five year old boy comes out, picks a flower, then runs back inside.  And now for something completely different.........



-------------------------

James Lindon, Ph.D. Patent Attorney
Lindon & Lindon, LLC
Cleveland, Ohio
Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Pharmacy Law, Litigation
[this is not legal advice - provided for discussion only]
Intellectual Property for the Individual and Small Business: Identify, Protect, Enforce, Defend.
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread."
http://www.LindonLaw.com
InactiveMember

posts: 705

Mar 26, 2007 12:13 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

Didn`t this ruling regard Target.com and a blind user?

CraigL

posts: 9051

Mar 26, 2007 2:38 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
Good to see another Monty Python fan around. :-)

But...I digress.

Can you imagine the number of Web sites that have NO alternate text for their images? Those would not be compliant, if they also offer any sort of product to anyone. Not just people with disabilities. The ADA apparently lets just about anyone claim they have a disability...regardless of whether it`s real.

I`m figuring the only way a site could be compliant would be for text readers. That`ll be interesting for all those Flash sites, and places where much of the content is embedded in images.

This is a perfect example of how "the needs of the few" override the reality (and rights) of the many. The result not only is to pull everything down to its lowest "common" denominator, it`s to throw us back into the obsolete past.

Can you say ASCII text Internet and Compuserve?
CraigL2007-3-26 3:39:35
SolidGrnd

posts: 1063

Mar 26, 2007 10:56 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

Okay...I agree with some of what has been said...and I personally don`t foresee any RAIDS happening over a site that isn`t compliant. I agree that requiring private companies to make their sites accessible is asinine...I DO believe that government sites should be though...and should be required to be. Having some law that requires it for private companies is definitely not the way to go...but I would have to say that for LARGE corporations that cater to LARGE populations (ie: Target, Walmart, etc.) why wouldn`t you want to be accessible??? Approximately 50 million disabled just in the US (and yes...I agree...some of those shouldn`t be on the list) and the approximately 600,000 legally blind (not visually impaired but completely blind) add an additional 2.4 million visually impaired in the US alone...that isn`t counting those around the globe...I would hardly say those are small pickins!?

I agree it should continue to be a choice made by companies on their own grounds and in their own way. I don`t think that making a site accessible requires it to be of prehistoric programming (the internet has only been around for like 10-15 years). I hardly think it will set the internet back to the ice age!? Again though...my question is this...why wouldn`t you want to make your site accessible to as many people as possible!? I think you forget that along with the 2.4 million who are visually impaired you have to add to that the other estimated 70 million who are disabled or mobility challenged across the globe!! No offense...but that hardly seems like a SMALL amount of people!!

Again...I fully agree that it should not be REQUIRED to do such changes...but dude...why the wouldn`t you WANT to!? You are basically alienating, at the VERY minimum, 2.4 million Americans (doesn`t include the rest of the world) from your site and thus your products or services! Aren`t we in this game of business to ATTRACT clients and customers!? Don`t we spend the stupid amount of time and money on creating websites so we can attract more clients and customers?

SolidGrnd2007-3-28 13:38:32


-------------------------

Leah Tucker
patentandtrademark

posts: 1332

Mar 26, 2007 11:14 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
Should business people be free to make bad business decisions?  Yes.

-------------------------

James Lindon, Ph.D. Patent Attorney
Lindon & Lindon, LLC
Cleveland, Ohio
Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Pharmacy Law, Litigation
[this is not legal advice - provided for discussion only]
Intellectual Property for the Individual and Small Business: Identify, Protect, Enforce, Defend.
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread."
http://www.LindonLaw.com
SolidGrnd

posts: 1063

Mar 26, 2007 1:49 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

Should business people be free to make bad business decisions?  Yes.

Agreed.



-------------------------

Leah Tucker
TwilightPics

posts: 42

Mar 26, 2007 4:36 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
But it`s not that hard make a site that is accessible. In fact, any competent web developer will build a site correctly meeting the majority of standards without any extra effort.  If you build a site the right way, it meets the guidelines anyway.

CarigL, you`re wrong thinking that accessible sites are going to slow down  the advancement of the web. Building a site with standards allows for better forward compatibility.  A site that is properly codded and separates style from content will allow MORE users WITH AND WITHOUT disabilities to access your site.  Mobile phone users, Mac or Windows OS, different browsers, different resolutions, screen readers, people with poor vision, people who use devices to help navigate. They will all benefit from an accessible site.

You can meet all the standards and STILL have your site looks just as good (or bad) as it does now.

You guys are acting like it is some HUGE daunting task to make a site accessible.  If you build your site right in the first place, you won`t have to change a thing.
TwilightPics2007-3-26 17:38:25
CraigL

posts: 9051

Mar 27, 2007 1:52 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
We don`t need a *law* to demand that sites be accessible. If a company wants the business from the fairly large market of people with legitimate disabilities, they`ll voluntarily make their site accessible. It`s good business, and good for profit.

Accessibility issues won`t at all affect the increasing use of the Web. But *forced* compliancy issues will sure as hell do some damage.

TwighlightPics suggests that a "properly coded" site will do this or that. What percentage of sites are properly coded? :-)

If we can`t even get any sort of consistency on the concept of proper coding, it`s utter nonsense for the Gub`mn`t to pretend that "saying so" is going to mean squat.
InactiveMember

posts: 705

Mar 27, 2007 2:44 AM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote

One principle that seems to be lost in this conversation is the tyranny of the majority. Just a few decades ago, inter-racial marriage was not just frowned upon by the majority. Civil rights as well. It`s pretty easy to be a rich, white male, and believe that the needs of the few should not override the rights of everyone else. In fact, it`s generally easier to be a straight white male than a man or woman of any color. There is so much institutional discrimination in this country that legislation is sometimes required to protect people from the majority. I hear a lot of Rush Limbaugh in some of the comments made here, and America needs fewer people like him. Not more.

On the other hand, we don`t need laws for everything. But that does assume that people are willing to make changes when someone speaks up. There would be no laws against sexual harrassment without the act of sexual harrassment. If more businesses were simply considerate ... perhaps the ADA would not be necessary. But you know what a lot of people hear when they ask for safe passage through society? A chorus of "f*** off". The white male aristocracy in this country - not all of it - has an astonishing sense of entitlement.

Target.com was the subject of a lawsuit brought under the ADA. This is a 25 billion dollar company that can`t make its web site accessible? Maybe the CEO of Target should take a few less flights on that jet of his.

« Prev Page of 22 Next »
Post Reply
 
.
Advertisement

Keep the Community Clean!

  • StartupNation forums should be used as a platform to learn, educate others, share stories, tips & tricks and to provide constructive feedback.
  • Please do not use the Forums for advertising & blatant self-promotion.
  • Please be respectful to other members and refrain from personal attacks and vulgar language.
  • StartupNation reserves the right to delete any message, reply, and/or member who violates our terms of use.
Read full terms of use
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement