3 ms·
>If you believe the ADA is a net negative, I originally didn't word that clear enough to avoid misinterpretation. The "net negative" was specifically about t
by jasode 10y ago
>If you believe the ADA is a net negative,
I originally didn't word that clear enough to avoid misinterpretation. The "net negative" was specifically about the free education videos and not about all ADA lawsuits in general. I added the "[about the free learning videos]" to make that reference clearer.
>Netflix won that appeal, and lost the next.
I see no cites that says Netflix lost another appeal to NAD after April 2015.
- falcolas 10y ago> was specifically about the free education videos MIT and Harvard were not following the law; the lawsuit simply attempts to bring them back in line. Free videos or not. MIT and Harvard both provide multiple ADA allowances as part of the cost of doing business; I think the question should be why are they trying to get around this one? The ADA has a history of trying to resolve these issues directly before resorting to lawsuits. > I see no cites that says Netflix lost another appeal to NAD after April 2015. My mistake; they were approached with a new lawsuit, and immediately decided to settle; the settlement document from April of this year: http://www.adatitleiii.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/121/2016/04/Settlement_Agreement_FOR_WEBSITEv2.pdf http://www.adatitleiii.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/121/2016...