really?
Can you direct me to any press on this? why them and not pizza hut or
paypal or another company? Is the access rooted in wacg 2.0? or the far less
productive focus on a specific access tool, a concept which itself
violates wacg 2.0?
On Sun, 25 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
And yet Domino's is being sued because their web site and app is not
accessible.
I agree with you but that doesn't mean law suits should never be filed.
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
On 8/25/19 4:21 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
The problem is most of us don't have money to hire lawyers. You'd be
amazed how many people are screwed over, shoved aside and ignored because
they lack the money, connections and clout to do anything. Companies
aren't going to listen to a few, or even a few hundred customers, unless
there's a clear advantage for them. That's why a lot of these complaints
never go anywhere.
----- Original Message -----
From: Linux for blind general discussion <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 16:18:37 -0500
Subject: Re: amazon?
> I agree litigation should be a final step, but there are also certain
sections of the blindness community who don't think law suits should
ever be used, and IMHO, this is just another extreme that should be
avoided. If a company isn't following the law, and nothing else is
working, then law suits are a perfectly reasonable tool.
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
--
Christopher (CJ)
Chaltain at Gmail
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
