2007 Issue 1 - New York City Bar Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Website Accessibility for People With Disabilitiess The Committee on Civil Rights, The Committee on Information Technology Law, The Committee on Legal Issues Affecting People With Disabilities 1. Interest of the New York City Bar Association This report examines the legal arguments that make the World Wide Web less than world wide for people with disabilities and demonstrates how those arguments do not withstand reasoned legal analysis. It is hoped that this report will benefit all concerned by promoting the integration of people with disabilities—and abilities—into mainstream society. The New York City Bar Association (“the Association”), founded in 1870, has more than 22,000 members residing throughout the United States. Through its standing committees, in particular its Committee on Legal Issues Affecting People with Disabilities and its Committee on Civil Rights, the Association has long been an opponent of unlawful discrimination against people with disabilities and a proponent of their inclusion in society to the fullest extent possible. Through its Committee on Information Technology, it has encouraged the application of information technology to serve people with disabilities and, more generally, to promote equality. As lawyers, members of the Association represent clients who may find this analysis helpful in determining whether the websites they use or sponsor should be made more accessible. Moreover, many members of the T H E R E C O R D 118
W E B S I T E A C C E S S I B I L I T Y F O R P E O P L E W I T H D I S A B I L I T I E S Association, like the members of society at large, whether with statutorily defined disabilities or not, have vision, hearing, motor and other impairments that require accommodation to enable them to participate in the age of technology. For instance, those with vision impairments or dyslexia know the difficulties of accessing websites with poor color contrast, tiny or ornate print, or without features necessary to use audible screen reading technology; those with hearing impairments know the frustration of trying to navigate a website that relies on audible cues and lacks accompanying textual cues; and those with limited manual dexterity know the hardship of trying to access computer functions designed to require more dexterity than these individuals possess. All of them know the isolation and discrimination of being unable to access factual and legal research tools, discounted on-line purchasing, and a myriad of other features available to their colleagues without disabilities—features that could be available to them, too, with appropriate website design. 2. Introduction and Summary The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), passed in 1990, provides, among other things, that “public accommodations,” such as stores, museums and travel services, may not discriminate against people with disabilities. The World Wide Web, created in 1989, came into wide public use about 1995. In 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court described the Web as “both a vast library including millions of readily available and indexed publications and a sprawling mall offering goods and services. From the publishers’ point of view, it constitutes a vast platform from which to address and hear from a world-wide audience of millions of readers, viewers, researchers, and buyers.” 1 Many businesses with walk-in offices or stores have moved all or part of their transactions to the Web. As the Department of Justice has noted, there is “a wide, and growing, range of services provided over the [I]nternet—from shopping to online banking and brokerage services to university degree courses—[that] are beginning to replace reliance on physical business locations.” 2 Some businesses encourage Web-only transactions, 1. Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 853 (1997). 2. Hooks v. OKBridge, Inc., No. 99-50891, at 9 (5 th Cir. 2000) (Brief of the United States as amicus curiae in support of Appellant, June 30, 2000) (“Hooks brief”), at www.usdoj.gov/crt/ app/briefs_disright.htm. (challenging alleged discrimination by a Website that conducted online bridge tournaments). Hooks v. OKBridge, Inc., No. 99-214 (W.D. Tex. Aug 4, 1999), aff’d without opinion, 232 F.3d 208 (5 th Cir. 2000) (holding that Title III does not apply to a Website because of lack of physical space (but see infra, Part 4)). 2 0 0 7 V O L. 6 2 , N O. 1 119
Page 1 and 2:
THE RECORD OF THE ASSOCIATION OF TH
Page 3 and 4:
Of Note THE NEW YORK CITY BAR PRESE
Page 5 and 6:
O F N O T E cial Department, were p
Page 7 and 8:
R E C E N T C O M M I T T E E R E P
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
P R E V E N T I O N A N D P R O S E
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68: P R E V E N T I O N A N D P R O S E
Page 69 and 70: P R E V E N T I O N A N D P R O S E
Page 71 and 72: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L devoted
Page 73 and 74: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L The Repo
Page 75 and 76: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L 2. It wo
Page 77 and 78: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L Territor
Page 79 and 80: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L the U.S.
Page 81 and 82: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L An exemp
Page 83 and 84: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L Conclusi
Page 85 and 86: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L do busin
Page 87 and 88: P A U L R. M C D A N I E L mestic i
Page 89 and 90: Recommendations on the Selection of
Page 91 and 92: Recommendations on the Selection of
Page 93 and 94: J U D I C I A L S E L E C T I O N S
Page 117: J U D I C I A L S E L E C T I O N S
Page 121 and 122: W E B S I T E A C C E S S I B I L I
Page 137 and 138: Formal Opinion 2006-3 Outsourcing L
Page 139 and 140: F O R M A L O P I N I O N 2 0 0 6 -
Page 147 and 148: Formal Opinion 2007-1 Applicability
Page 155 and 156: Formal Opinion 2007-2 Secondment of
Page 165 and 166: Report of the Task Force on the Law
Page 167 and 168: L A W Y E R ’ S R O L E I N C O R
Page 169 and 170:
L A W Y E R ’ S R O L E I N C O R
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225:
show all

2007 Issue 1 - New York City Bar Association

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?