4 ms·
The legal aspect smells like a law about fixing inequality. The inequality of >deaf people< not being able to consume this publicly funded material. Seems appro
by ncr100 10y ago
The legal aspect smells like a law about fixing inequality. The inequality of >deaf people< not being able to consume this publicly funded material. Seems appropriate to me given the ADA.
https://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htm https://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htm
> "...civil rights legislation that prohibits discrimination and guarantees that people with disabilities have the same opportunities as everyone else to participate in the mainstream of American life -- to enjoy employment opportunities..."
In the mean-time could these folks simply repost the catalog to YT?
- mikeash 10y agoRequiring publicly funded materials to be accessible seems like a good thing. But there must be better ways to enforce it than taking down existing material that doesn't qualify. Not that I can immediately come up with one.
- rhino369 10y agoChange the law such that removing/ceasing/etc doesn't cure the breach of the ADA. That way Berkley has to provide closed captioned videos even if they take them down. That would remove any incentive to take them down. You'd probably have to include some exceptions for when the expense is too great (but I'm fairly sure the ADA only requires accommodations that are reasonable).
- dclowd9901 10y agoPublicly-funded and created materials should also benefit from earmarked accessibility funding.
- zapt02 10y agoBut if they do that, they can't plug their new hip blockchain in the process! /s