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

41–50 of 620 posts

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

#41

Post by zaroth »

0xEFF wrote: post #15
nvahalik wrote: post #9

This seems like overreach. Clearly the law doesn’t cover websites. Why can’t congress just pass a law to make the ADA apply to websites? It’s not SCOTUS’s job to create law.

The law has covered websites for decades. It used to be not that much of a problem because screen readers worked well enough with plain html.

Pretty sure the law doesn't say anything in particular about websites.

I don't usually find myself scratching my head at SCOTUS. Full and equal enjoyment of the goods and services is the pizza, not the website. The website is just one means of obtaining said pizza.

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

#42

Post by chrisco255 »

tibbon wrote: post #29
yostrovs wrote: post #12

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.

It’s a myth that reasonable accommodations are too much of a burden for a small business to handle. Having a menu made into Braille for example isn’t going to cost a ton. On the upside, they would also now have business available that they didn’t have in the past.

I wonder why Domino's having a phone number to call in orders isn't enough of an accommodation in this case?

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

#43

Post by CaliforniaKarl »

Meekro wrote: post #14

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.

I don’t have a screen reader handy, but I wonder if someone using that would be able to navigate to the local store’s phone number from the front page.

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

#44

Post by DoreenMichele »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #26
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.

But you can call your local Domino's on the phone.

You can't get (or use) Rewards points unless you order online. They also have online coupons and discounts.

They actively encourage customers to order online, pick up in person and do carry out. Most locations have minimal seating and minimal staff. Some don't even bother to have bathrooms for their customers.

Their business model actively tries to reduce the amount of overhead for the business by promoting online ordering and carryout service. So, no, ordering by phone isn't the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.

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

#45

Post by zamadatix »

yostrovs wrote: post #12

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.

It depends what is considered "accessible enough". E.g. they may not have a braille menu but there is a person you can communicate with. In the same regard maybe a site that signals "you can call this number to have assisted service" is alright.

I haven't read into what the exact ruling covered I'm just pointing out it doesn't have to be black and white to the point it runs all guy large places out of business.

Edit: apparently my phone typing speed is no match for the interest in this topic :)

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

#46

Post by Meekro »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #40
Meekro wrote: post #14

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.

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.

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

#47

Post by jcranmer »

Some clarity on the matter:

The Supreme Court didn't say anything. All they did was decline to hear the appeal.

From skimming the petition and responses, it looks like the situation is that the 9th Circuit is allowing the case to go ahead to determine whether or not Domino's website is violating accessibility requirements, which means that there's not a lot of facts and administrative record for SCOTUS to attempt to decide if the reasoning as to how to determine how the ADA applies here. In other words, this does feel like a case that SCOTUS rejected in large part because the petition is way too premature--the respondent's brief definitely feels far more persuasive to me than the petitioner's (Domino's) briefs.

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

#48

Post by dexwiz »

I see a lot of negativity in the comments. I imagine much of that is gut reactions of web developers hearing they need to do more work.

As a web developer that has had to pass an accessibility review from a person who is actually blind each release for the last two years, I can tell you it’s not that hard. Make sure you have a sensible tab order and labels on forms and you are 80% there. The hard issues are creating hidden buttons for drag and drop interactions and announcing changes in the view.

Honestly it’s more keyboard nav than label work anyways. For as many vim lovers as I meet, many developers seem to falsely believe you need a mouse to use the web.

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

#49

Post by robotstate »

CaliforniaKarl wrote: post #19
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #3

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.…

Like it or not, these businesses will pop up. There are already companies doing similar things for privacy compliance.

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

#50

Post by weberc2 »

CaliforniaKarl wrote: post #19
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #3

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.…

There have been businesses that provide compliance services for forever. I would expect ADA compliance to be dramatically simpler and easier than HIPPA or SOC or GDPR.
Post reply on HN