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

71–80 of 620 posts

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

#71

Post by notyourwork »

dexwiz wrote: post #48

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…

The key is actually using a screen reader and better yet having someone with accessibly needs provide feedback. Following guidelines is great but usability is only great when you actually see how someone interacts with your site. Again though, it’s not that hard.

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

#72

Post by DoreenMichele »

anonytrary wrote: post #25

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.

People with disabilities need online access more than "normal" people so as to help make the rest of their lives work. Disabilities that make it difficult to get out and about and effectively go about their business in person can be hugely mitigated by options like online ordering, assuming the online experience is accessible.

What is a mere convenience for many people is de facto the equivalent of a flying wheelchair for handicapped people -- when it actually works for them and isn't some new "fuck you" from the world.

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

#73

Post by tomnipotent »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #44
diebeforei485 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 or…

> Some don't even bother to have bathrooms for their customers.

At least in California, any business with eat-in food services is required (by law) to provide restrooms. If a Domino's franchise does not offer eat-in service, it's entirely reasonable (and legal) they don't have public restrooms.

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

#74

Post by mltony »

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 of them you won't be able to use. Imagine that you cannot order from some online stores. You cannot fly certain airlines. And apparently you cannot order some pizza online. Worst of all you don't magically know whether a web site is accessible or not. You just go to web site and try it, spend some time to learn the layout - it typically takes blind peple longer to familiarize with new web sites, spend thirty minutes to fill out the details of your order and then when you try to click the submit button, you figure out that it wouldn't click for some reason. Being a developer you open HTML code just to realize that this is some weird kind of button that can only be clicked with the mouse, but not a screenreader. But hey, your screenreader can route the mouse cursor to this button and simulate a click. So you try a real mouse click and it still doesn't work for some reason, and I have no idea why. Finally, you give up. I hope I managed to convey a typical sense of frustration with a web-site that is not that accessible. I do get arguments of other people that it might be hard for small businesses to make their web sites accessible. and I don't know where to draw a line, but I need to say that Domino's is a large enough company and even though I hate counting other companies' money, I must say they're big enough to be able to afford to make their web-site accessible.

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

#75

Post by freeone3000 »

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…

No, your personal website does not count. Yes, it does if you sell t-shirts. No, a forum is insufficient, it needs to actually be a business. Yes, aria labels are compelled speech, but they're upheld[1]. There would be an exemption if the burden was "undue", but you're not going to meet that by claiming it's a few extra hours of work. If accessibility standards change, you are compelled to upgrade your site if you're under the ADA.

And yes, courts really do want to get into the issue of which businesses need to comply and which don't, regardless of whether they exist physically or as a website.

[1] https://www.ada.gov/briefs/uc_berkley_lof.pdf

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

#76

Post by notyourwork »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #44
diebeforei485 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 or…

Seems like they missed a demographic with their strategy. It shouldn’t be hard to add accessibility support to their site.

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

#77

Post by couchand »

Despite the somewhat misleading headline, the Supreme Court didn't really say anything new here. They declined to hear Domino's appeal of the Ninth Circuit's (unanimous and clearly correctly decided) reversal of the District Court's absurd dismissal.

Domino's tried to claim that their due process rights were being violated since there is no federally-mandated standard for accessibility. But the ADA is clear: businesses have a legal requirement to ensure that disabled customers have "full and equal enjoyment" of their goods and services. Domino's made the tenuous argument that the lack of a specific standard meant that they didn't receive fair notice.

Robles, the plaintiff, argued that the appropriate standard to apply was WCAG 2.0. Instead of offering a different possible standard (which would have been a defensible legal rationale), Domino's position was basically, "fuck off".

It's really not hard to make your websites accessible at a basic level. Follow the standards. Make sure your content and markup are reasonably semantic. Use standard form components for data entry. Where more complex, visual-first designs are employed, make sure there are text-based fallbacks.

If you are a professional software developer, doing this is not just your legal responsibility, it's your moral responsibility.

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

#79

Post by edoo »

dexwiz wrote: post #48

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…

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

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

#80

Post by tyingq »

notyourwork wrote: post #71
dexwiz wrote: post #48

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…

The key is actually using a screen reader and better yet having someone with accessibly needs provide feedback. Following guidelines is great but usability is only great when you actually see how someone interacts with your site. Again though, it’s not that hard.

On the other hand, there's probably two goals here. Making it work well, and avoiding a lawsuit. I imagine the latter involves a lot more work.
Post reply on HN