Main > Everything Else

Blind people sue Target because they can't access Target's website.

<< < (10/33) > >>

leapinlew:
I suppose next the National Association of Archers will sue Target because they shot their monitors out with arrows when Targets web page loaded.

boykster:
Target should spin target.com off into its own company, not directly associated with the B&M target stores......kinda like how Circuit City and CircuitCity.com used to be / still are seperate companies with a working agreement on order fulfillment.

too late though for this lawsuit.....

shmokes:

--- Quote from: leapinlew on October 03, 2007, 03:42:59 pm ---
If this suit is lost, I suppose they can then try to sue the software package that cannot read their website properly. Either way, someone is getting sued.


--- End quote ---

Once again, that's not how it works, leapinlew.  Chad basically nailed it.  The question is, does ADA consider websites to be analogs of brick and mortar retailers, imposing analogical accessibility requirements.  Of course, considering the intent of the law, I can't imagine that anyone honestly considering the issue would suggest that when congress was passing a law attempting to give blind people equal access to retailers that they would seriously have required a business to spend tens of thousands of dollars to install ramps, and make signs with braille, etc., etc., but they would have exempted websites.  The laws were simply passed in 1990 and 1992.  There was no internet then as far as commerce was concerned.

But common sense aside, I really don't think Chad is saying what you think he's saying.  It seems to me that he just stated an objective issue before the court.  Since the case is now officially going to trial, the court will address the issue and give us a holding. 

I doubt he would get behind you on your assertion that the company making the software package could be sued.  Once again, unhappiness or disappointment alone are not legal claims.  You have to have a legal cause of action to bring a case to trial.  You have to be able to state a claim.  ADA says that Target MUST give full access to their facilities and services to blind people.  It doesn't say that every product on the shelves must be blind-person friendly.  It doesn't even talk about products.  A blind person can't sue Blizzard for not making World of Warcraft accessible to the visually impaired, because there is no law requiring them to do so.  There is a law requiring retailers to give blind people full access to their services and public facilities, so a blind person CAN sue a retailer who fails to do so.  I don't see what is so hard about that concept.

shmokes:

--- Quote from: leapinlew on October 03, 2007, 04:44:24 pm ---I suppose next the National Association of Archers will sue Target because they shot their monitors out with arrows when Targets web page loaded.



--- End quote ---

Legal cause of action, leapinlew.  Legal cause of action.  Necessary.  Cannot sue without it.  Law must be broken.  Repeat after me: Cause.  Of.  Action.

leapinlew:

--- Quote from: shmokes on October 03, 2007, 05:02:13 pm ---
--- Quote from: leapinlew on October 03, 2007, 04:44:24 pm ---I suppose next the National Association of Archers will sue Target because they shot their monitors out with arrows when Targets web page loaded.



--- End quote ---

Legal cause of action, leapinlew.  Legal cause of action.  Necessary.  Cannot sue without it.  Law must be broken.  Repeat after me: Cause.  Of.  Action.

--- End quote ---
You should sue god for not giving you a sense of humor

Repeat after me:
HOT COFFEE IN LAP

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version