31–40 of 620 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a new market actually. But I guess startups can be anything now.
A start-up is nothing more than a new business. Has no relationship with market segment or particular technology or whether that tech is new or old.
I'm in favor of requiring that all deals and coupons be available via all methods of ordering, with things such as app-required deals only being legal if the app is accessible to the blind. Other than that, I fail to see how having phone ordering doesn't completely cover the accessibility requirement. It's very easy to get silly with these requirements. Should comedians be required to provide transcripts for deaf peo…
Does the ADA really apply and enforced at all publicly available businesses? Does every Chinese restaurant in Chinatown have a Braille menu? If we really start enforcing this, only larger businesses will survive.
Sounds like a great start-up opportunity. Turnkey and ongoing accessibility compliance.
I really hope not. I don’t think “X compliance” is a good idea for a startup, because of trust and liability. Whomever does the compliant would either need a ton of liability insurance, or would need contract language that actually gets them out of responsibility (similar to the language in many travel insurance and point-of-dale service plans). The former would be expensive, so you’d probably end up with the latter.…
Then the Supreme Court is wrong (which isn't impossible, by the way). If I draw on my street with chalk, should I also be compelled to play a cassette on repeat outside my driveway describing what the picture is? This is absurd.
But if you want to order online, then you increasing often have to interact with a website. Brick and mortar have employees that could help you, websites do not.
The reverse of this situation would be telling people with wheelchairs that they should only shop online instead of expecting accessible stores.
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/01/15/17...
A denial of cert doesn't mean the supreme court necessarily has an opinion on the merits of the case. Courts in other circuits can still rule otherwise, and SCOTUS might eventually decide to hear such a case at a later time.
If you're blind, can't you just call up a Dominos to order your pizza? "Talk to a human and order your pizza" sounds like a friendlier approach than the automated screen reader or whatever they'll come up with to resolve this litigation.
And then they'd be compliant.
If you're blind, can't you just call up a Dominos to order your pizza? "Talk to a human and order your pizza" sounds like a friendlier approach than the automated screen reader or whatever they'll come up with to resolve this litigation.