3 ms·

I agree that it would be less-ambulance-chase-y if there was a compliance agency (such as the FTC or some other bureau) where websites could be "neutrally audit

I agree that it would be less-ambulance-chase-y if there was a compliance agency (such as the FTC or some other bureau) where websites could be "neutrally audited" for ADA compliance and then presented with a list of priority action items to fix. I believe it would be possible to mostly automate audit-report generation as well, since there are already ADA-checker browser extensions and tools. A "one-strike, warning-first" system is less punitive-focused than the current system, and less likely to be abused by law firms for the goal of a quick cash grab. Personally, I would prefer to be informed and given a chance to fix something before being punished and branded as someone who hates the disabled by a law firm. How many of their websites are 100% ADA-compliant? Obviously, it's important to be considerate about providing usable online experiences for the disabled. That should be a common goal. However, I've seen ADA lawsuit letters as ridiculous as the DCMA Youtube ones. There's an entire shitty industry centered around mailing out thousands of these letters per week hoping to collect back enough bribes to not go to court. These law firms are just like other corporations looking for a revenue stream to pad their bottomline. Contrary to their ads, they are not fighting for others or pursuing justice for society, they are trying to get rich.

DanBC 7y ago
We tried self regulation. We saw it being ignored widely. See for example universities not making their material accessible. People on HN lost their minds when video material was taken down for violating accessibility standards. What people failed to realise was that the universities imposed a condition (that the videos had to be accessible); they provided advice and help to make the video accessible; they asked professors to sign off that the videos were accessible; and those professors lied and said "yep no problems" even when no work had been done on accessibility. The courts are the only way to drive change.

DanBC 7y ago

We tried self regulation. We saw it being ignored widely. See for example universities not making their material accessible. People on HN lost their minds when video material was taken down for violating accessibility standards. What people failed to realise was that the universities imposed a condition (that the videos had to be accessible); they provided advice and help to make the video accessible; they asked professors to sign off that the videos were accessible; and those professors lied and said "yep no problems" even when no work had been done on accessibility. The courts are the only way to drive change.