Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 620 posts

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#111

Post by eloff »

mltony wrote: post #74

Blind programmer here. Just a glimpse of my life. Blind people have to live in an environment where X% of web sites and programs are not accessible, where X varies somewhere from 20% (for web sites) to 50% (for desktop applications). That's just my approximation of the state of accessibility these days. Now imagine that you live in the world where you don't know which printer or wi-fi router to buy, since maybe half…

Pardon my curiosity, did you type this on a keyboard by touch typing? If so how do you recognize and correct typos? Or did you use speech recognition? Same question about handling errors.

I'd like to make sites I build more accessible, but I must admit I'm only familiar with the bare minimal guidelines I've read in a couple articles. I don't even know if they're correct or up to date. Nobody I've worked for has ever made this a priority, so I'm quite ignorant on the subject.

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#112

Post by edoo »

aaomidi wrote: post #86
edoo wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is being forced at gunpoint to build services into your business.

This isn't an issue, its a feature. You live in a society so you plan around to serve that society. If you're not serving a large portion of your population then you're going to be forced to. This is no different than outlawing racial discrimination.

Completely incorrect. Denying someone service is completely different than them being unable to access your business because you can't afford to build out the accommodations. The constitution first and foremost guarantees freedom. Being forced to work at gunpoint is known as slavery.

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#113

Post by learc83 »

Meekro wrote: post #46
colejohnson66 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some deals were online only. Presumably to encourage people to use the website and not bother employees with having to answer the phone.

That's a fair point. Sounds like this can be resolved with a simple new rule: if you're blind, you can get online-only deals over the phone.

It's probably easier to just rework the website than to try to enact that policy. Training, print collateral, keeping employees updated on current coupons verifying blindness. Vs some front end changes.

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#114

Post by anonytrary »

freeone3000 wrote: post #90
anonytrary wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this snippet. The ADA is somewhat reasonable for having included the "undue burden" clause, however, it is probably an undue burden for a small online website to prove that supporting disabled users would be an undue burden. At the end of the day, this is just more red tape that will probably hurt small sites or deter them from being made.

It's not an undue burden. Either don't break screen readers with javascript bullshit, or un-break them by having a sane tab order and present aria tags and image descriptions. Try it with keyboard navigation, listen to what it sounds like, and if it's functional , you pass. It's not that hard.

> Either don't break screen readers with javascript bullshit

It's your site. You have the freedom to break your own property. This is apparently a contradiction. This addition seems to say that I can't break my own property if it means some people can't see it. How is this constitutional?

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#115

Post by snagglegaggle »

tylerl wrote: post #91
Retric wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Restaurants don’t need a Braille menu to accommodate blind customers, a sighted employee can walk them through the ordering process. With websites that’s not always an option, which is legally and morally an issue.

It's curious then that they're suing Domino's. Domino's has a phone number, and every capability the company offers over the web it offers over the phone. In fact, since this business in particular was built on telephone-based ordering, the the phone option is actually the first-class experience, with the web offering only a fraction of the options otherwise available. So at least in this case, ordering pizza over th…

That's a good point, though something I see commonly is a rather sizeable discount for doing an online-only order. Yes, you lose the discount if you call in.

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#116

Post by Pinckney »

verroq wrote: post #106
Meekro wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fair point. Sounds like this can be resolved with a simple new rule: if you're blind, you can get online-only deals over the phone.

So now everyone can pretend to be blind to take advantage of online only deals on the phone?

Indeed, what honest business can hope to survive in the face of such reckless malevolence? Truly, it is the end of e-commerce as we know it!

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#117

Post by throwaway_bad »

clamprecht wrote: post #99
mltony wrote: post #74

Blind programmer here. Just a glimpse of my life. Blind people have to live in an environment where X% of web sites and programs are not accessible, where X varies somewhere from 20% (for web sites) to 50% (for desktop applications). That's just my approximation of the state of accessibility these days. Now imagine that you live in the world where you don't know which printer or wi-fi router to buy, since maybe half…

Is there some kind of "Yelp for websites for blind people"? In other words, a web site for blind people that lets you know whether a given site works with your screen reader? It seems like it could be a big time saver.

It there is one, I hope they made it styled with black on black text and/or with a braille font!

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#118

Post by jcranmer »

ccleve wrote: post #58

On the surface, this sounds like a fine thing. Who doesn't want accessible websites? But it really opens a can of worms. What's a place of public accommodation? With brick-and-mortar, it's easy; if you have a physical location open to the general public, it probably qualifies. But on the web? Does my personal website count? What if I sell t-shirts on it? What if I don't sell anything, but have forums where the public…

> But it really opens a can of worms. What's a place of public accommodation? With brick-and-mortar, it's easy; if you have a physical location open to the general public, it probably qualifies. But on the web?

If this is the question you want to answer, then you should agree with SCOTUS that this case should not be heard. A pizza delivery company falls very clearly on one side of the question. Instead, you should wait until a case comes up that actually squarely deals with the question of if an online-only site might qualify as a place of public accommodation.

The best you can get with this case as it stands is whether or not the website of a brick-and-mortar store must be accessible. And since trial hasn't even started, you don't even have any sense yet of what the interpretation of "the website must be accessible" even means.

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#119

Post by rgoldste »

mltony wrote: post #74

Blind programmer here. Just a glimpse of my life. Blind people have to live in an environment where X% of web sites and programs are not accessible, where X varies somewhere from 20% (for web sites) to 50% (for desktop applications). That's just my approximation of the state of accessibility these days. Now imagine that you live in the world where you don't know which printer or wi-fi router to buy, since maybe half…

Curious, not trying to be a jerk. For something like ordering pizza (or even plane tickets), how much worse is calling to make the order as opposed to ordering online?

Re: Supreme Court allows blind people to sue retailers if websites aren't accessible

#120

Post by thereare5lights »

edoo wrote: post #112
aaomidi wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an issue, its a feature. You live in a society so you plan around to serve that society. If you're not serving a large portion of your population then you're going to be forced to. This is no different than outlawing racial discrimination.

Completely incorrect. Denying someone service is completely different than them being unable to access your business because you can't afford to build out the accommodations. The constitution first and foremost guarantees freedom. Being forced to work at gunpoint is known as slavery.

Better tell that to the people that maintain jury duty, or the Selective Service
Post reply on HN