6 ms·

> This attack entirely breaks tab ordering, deeming the internet unusable for people requiring software assistance to provide accessibility to the World Wide We

> This attack entirely breaks tab ordering, deeming the internet unusable for people requiring software assistance to provide accessibility to the World Wide Web. Additionally, the “escape” key, which is often used to close dialogs, doesn’t close the Xfinity notice. A few weeks (months?) back there was an article about ongoing litigation on if websites are required to have accessibility compliance under the ADA act. I would be very happy to see Xfinity sued for this practice under that precedent and hopefully any injection would be considered a violation. Status of supreme court case: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/dominos-pizza-llc-v-robles/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/dominos-pizza-ll...

hypersoar 7y ago
The litigation is over. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case a few weeks ago. The "Petition DENIED" at the bottom of that status page is referring to the petition for cert.
- AaronFriel 7y ago
  That is inaccurate for many reasons. The Supreme Court declined to overturn the Ninth Circuit, because there was no circuit split or other issue of such urgency to require the Supreme Court to weigh in. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled (somewhat) in favor of the plaintiffs, and remanded the matter to the district court having reversed the lower court on some questions of law. I think it is still a live controversy in the district court, but it seems likely that the plaintiffs will win on the merits or obtain a settlement. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/01/15/17-55504.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/01/15/1...
  - bumbledraven 7y ago
    You wrote "That is inaccurate", but you didn't cite a single inaccuracy in the gp comment. You wrote some other sentences, but they don't appear to contradict anything gp wrote.
    - bcrosby95 7y ago
      The GP claimed litigation was over. The parent claims it isn't over. Oftentimes higher courts decide a specific question pertaining to a case, not the whole case. Just because a higher court clarifies something doesn't mean litigation is over - it means the lower courts can continue with that point now clarified and/or corrected.
      - bumbledraven 7y ago
        Thank you for the further explanation. I see what you mean.
- balls187 7y ago
  The litigation is on going. The Supreme Court declined to hear the petition to essentially throw the case out, in effect paving the way for trial between the plantiff and Dominoes.
jorvi 7y ago
Only tangentially related, but how is the ADA act looked upon by Americans? The only time I've heard about it as an European was when Stanford (?) was forced by litigation to take entire swathes of free online education offline because it didn't have subtitles. I'm all for making the web more accessible but it really soured me on the notion of such acts and if they are the best way to enforce said accessibility.
- r00fus 7y ago
  All tools can be used for good or ill. The ADA has made the US a whole lot more accessible for many folks from wheelchair ramps everywhere to disability accommodations at fun parks.
- morpheuskafka 7y ago
  Most everyday Americans probably know very little about its particulars, though they all know the name. Business owners, especially small business owners, are well aware of its abuse on several fronts, from labeling pets as "emotional support" (fortunately this has been clearly rejected by statute, but people try it anyway), to suing business owners because their wheelchair ramps are the wrong angle, to examples such as the one you mention (which to me was a violation of free speech as well). I am all for web accessibility, and I think companies and developers should consider it a priority, but I do not think a law like the ADA is a good fit for this issue. The parts of the ADA that are good are the prohibition on actively discriminating against people with disabilities and requiring reasonable changes in policies. Requiring buildings to be rebuilt and taking down websites are excessive infringements on freedom and would best be addressed by the free market. Here are some links you might find interesting: https://www.the-american-interest.com/2013/06/11/the-disabling-of-america/ https://www.the-american-interest.com/2013/06/11/the-disabli... https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/ada-trolls-and-unintended-consequences https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/ada-trolls-and-unintended-... https://www.city-journal.org/beyonce-lawsuit-ada https://www.city-journal.org/beyonce-lawsuit-ada https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/parking-lot-trolls-lawsuit-happy-ada-defenders-are-officially-enemies-of-the-state-8586200 https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/parking-lot-trolls-laws... https://adadefense.net/ https://adadefense.net/
badrabbit 7y ago
This is a criminal case, I for one cannot accept a financiap repercussion for this.
qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago
Our industry was attempted to be shaken down by hacks filing frivolous lawsuits against single owners.

hypersoar 7y ago

The litigation is over. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case a few weeks ago. The "Petition DENIED" at the bottom of that status page is referring to the petition for cert.

AaronFriel 7y ago
That is inaccurate for many reasons. The Supreme Court declined to overturn the Ninth Circuit, because there was no circuit split or other issue of such urgency to require the Supreme Court to weigh in. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled (somewhat) in favor of the plaintiffs, and remanded the matter to the district court having reversed the lower court on some questions of law. I think it is still a live controversy in the district court, but it seems likely that the plaintiffs will win on the merits or obtain a settlement. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/01/15/17-55504.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/01/15/1...
- bumbledraven 7y ago
  You wrote "That is inaccurate", but you didn't cite a single inaccuracy in the gp comment. You wrote some other sentences, but they don't appear to contradict anything gp wrote.
  - bcrosby95 7y ago
    The GP claimed litigation was over. The parent claims it isn't over. Oftentimes higher courts decide a specific question pertaining to a case, not the whole case. Just because a higher court clarifies something doesn't mean litigation is over - it means the lower courts can continue with that point now clarified and/or corrected.
    - bumbledraven 7y ago
      Thank you for the further explanation. I see what you mean.
balls187 7y ago
The litigation is on going. The Supreme Court declined to hear the petition to essentially throw the case out, in effect paving the way for trial between the plantiff and Dominoes.

jorvi 7y ago

Only tangentially related, but how is the ADA act looked upon by Americans? The only time I've heard about it as an European was when Stanford (?) was forced by litigation to take entire swathes of free online education offline because it didn't have subtitles. I'm all for making the web more accessible but it really soured me on the notion of such acts and if they are the best way to enforce said accessibility.

r00fus 7y ago
All tools can be used for good or ill. The ADA has made the US a whole lot more accessible for many folks from wheelchair ramps everywhere to disability accommodations at fun parks.
morpheuskafka 7y ago
Most everyday Americans probably know very little about its particulars, though they all know the name. Business owners, especially small business owners, are well aware of its abuse on several fronts, from labeling pets as "emotional support" (fortunately this has been clearly rejected by statute, but people try it anyway), to suing business owners because their wheelchair ramps are the wrong angle, to examples such as the one you mention (which to me was a violation of free speech as well). I am all for web accessibility, and I think companies and developers should consider it a priority, but I do not think a law like the ADA is a good fit for this issue. The parts of the ADA that are good are the prohibition on actively discriminating against people with disabilities and requiring reasonable changes in policies. Requiring buildings to be rebuilt and taking down websites are excessive infringements on freedom and would best be addressed by the free market. Here are some links you might find interesting: https://www.the-american-interest.com/2013/06/11/the-disabling-of-america/ https://www.the-american-interest.com/2013/06/11/the-disabli... https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/ada-trolls-and-unintended-consequences https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/ada-trolls-and-unintended-... https://www.city-journal.org/beyonce-lawsuit-ada https://www.city-journal.org/beyonce-lawsuit-ada https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/parking-lot-trolls-lawsuit-happy-ada-defenders-are-officially-enemies-of-the-state-8586200 https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/parking-lot-trolls-laws... https://adadefense.net/ https://adadefense.net/

badrabbit 7y ago

This is a criminal case, I for one cannot accept a financiap repercussion for this.

qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago

Our industry was attempted to be shaken down by hacks filing frivolous lawsuits against single owners.