Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
From: Graphics Web Designing, LLC OK speaking because I am paraplegic, a piece of plywood would do just fine to get someone up a step, now if you are in a building that just has a small lip, I do not use a ramp when I go to my mother's house, it's called pop a wheelie and get your Arz in the door. Sherri === Love your attitude Sherri ; ) Jeff www.junglejims.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
I am curious, how would the DDA law applies to social networking site that content is pretty much user generated, and even the web application like Gmail, Yahoo Mail and many google web application. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
Hi Tee Like most things in the law, there's no clear-cut answer to that. Like the DDA in the UK (as I understand it), it's up to an individual to make a complaint that they have been discriminated by on the basis of their disability. The HREOC guidelines tend to suggest that if you've built your site to at least WCAG level A you should be fairly safe saying that you've taken 'reasonable care'. Government websites are required to reach level A - there's an interesting argument going on at the moment re the new http://www.grocerychoice.com.au/ website: http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,24141741-15319,00.html William noted that ... for commercial organisations, if they are not providing a service where they are the sole provider and access point, the lines get fuzzy on what is and is not disciminatory. I'm not sure that he's right in that: there haven't been any cases regarding websites, but there has been at least one case regarding access to educational services and the (private) school concerned wasn't sole provider. Elizabeth Spiegel Web editing 0409 986 158 GPO Box 729, Hobart TAS 7001 www.spiegelweb.com.au -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tee Sent: Monday, 18 August 2008 12:19 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee On Aug 15, 2008, at 9:07 PM, Elizabeth Spiegel wrote: Hi Tee In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, although there has only been one successful suit to date. Bruce Maguire was awarded damages of $20,000 against SOCOG in 2000: full details here: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/decisions/comdec/2000/DD000120.htm Note that the target was not by any measure a 'small business'. HREOC provides advisory notes http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.html *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
On 21 Aug 2008, at 17:56, Jon Warner wrote: If I hosted a party, of course I would do my best to accommodate everyone's needs but to receive a court summons several days later because i had not installed a wheelchair ramp, for example, is surely wrong. The wheelchair ramp analogy, whilst not perfect, is a useful one I think. To refer to the example you used, I don't see that anyone would expect you to install a wheelchair ramp for the sake of a one-off private party (although if you invited your wheelchair-using friends they might get a bit p**sed off if you hadn't catered for them). I guess the equivalent of that on the internet is a personal site or blog which, whilst existing on the public internet, makes no attempt to provide content aimed at the wider public, and is simply a vanity site of one sort or another. However, a site that provides a service to the wider public (be that in the form of information, professional debate, selling a product or service, or anything else like that), then the analogous 'real world' experience would be that of a shop or library or seminar venue not installing a ramp, and that of course is a very different situation because the service provided has an implied invitation to the public as a whole. To use your party analogy, the private party would be a nightclub open to all-comers; whether they have to pay to enjoy the service is immaterial, the implied invitation to the public is there. In the vanity site situation I guess that the more personal the site content the harder it would be to bring discrimination case (though I / suppose/ that someone could argue -- just -- that they were desperately interested in what you had for breakfast and that since the site is on the public internet they have a right to be able to access it); with the second situation, however, the 'service offered to the public' aspect means that the potential for a law suit is very clear. Just my take. -- Rick Lecoat www.sharkattack.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
In the US, there already has been a few lawsuits against big name corporations, I believe Southwest Airlines and Holiday Inn both settled. The current one is Target http://www.jimthatcher.com/law-target.htm. I feel, maybe incorrectly, that current law suits at least in the US are brought against large big name organizations for a reason. The importance of Target has to do with the American with Disabilities Act and the question whether this law has to expand to include the virtual world has to adhere to the same accessibility standards as the brick and mortar world. Nancy On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Rick Lecoat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 21 Aug 2008, at 17:56, Jon Warner wrote: If I hosted a party, of course I would do my best to accommodate everyone's needs but to receive a court summons several days later because i had not installed a wheelchair ramp, for example, is surely wrong. The wheelchair ramp analogy, whilst not perfect, is a useful one I think. To refer to the example you used, I don't see that anyone would expect you to install a wheelchair ramp for the sake of a one-off private party (although if you invited your wheelchair-using friends they might get a bit p**sed off if you hadn't catered for them). I guess the equivalent of that on the internet is a personal site or blog which, whilst existing on the public internet, makes no attempt to provide content aimed at the wider public, and is simply a vanity site of one sort or another. However, a site that provides a service to the wider public (be that in the form of information, professional debate, selling a product or service, or anything else like that), then the analogous 'real world' experience would be that of a shop or library or seminar venue not installing a ramp, and that of course is a very different situation because the service provided has an implied invitation to the public as a whole. To use your party analogy, the private party would be a nightclub open to all-comers; whether they have to pay to enjoy the service is immaterial, the implied invitation to the public is there. In the vanity site situation I guess that the more personal the site content the harder it would be to bring discrimination case (though I /suppose/ that someone could argue -- just -- that they were desperately interested in what you had for breakfast and that since the site is on the public internet they have a right to be able to access it); with the second situation, however, the 'service offered to the public' aspect means that the potential for a law suit is very clear. Just my take. -- Rick Lecoat www.sharkattack.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
OK speaking because I am paraplegic, a piece of plywood would do just fine to get someone up a step, now if you are in a building that just has a small lip, I do not use a ramp when I go to my mother's house, it's called pop a wheelie and get your Arz in the door. Now those that jump and run for a lawsuit is just dumb and have nothing better to do they prey upon those that do not know. If I was someone that knew someone that did that I would tell them that if they are such a pro then perhaps they should start a group and inform others of how to handle parties of those that use a wheelchair and me personally would have to say something to the idiot that ran to a lawyer just for the lawsuit, that is just stupid and looking for trouble down the road and a rep so I guess they do not want many friends. Please, just because you are in a wheelchair does not mean that you are dead!, do something with your life! And for those of you that do not believe I am in a wheelchair I will be more than glad to show you a pic just email me I am not one that takes no for an answer and just let others do things for me I am one of those that do use a wheelchair and can provide for myself and others. Sherri Graphics Web Designing, LLC (941)429-5005 (941)525-3955 Cell (941)426-8117 Fax/Phone (877)447-8932 Have a great day. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webgraphicdesigning.com Save on your next Vacation/Travel Check out our online travel site and save money. As independent certified referral travel agents (RTA's), we offer the same travel vendors you already know at prices which rival Orbitz, Expedia, Travelocity. You're already booking online...why not book with someone you know...us! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Johnson Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:59 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites In the US, there already has been a few lawsuits against big name corporations, I believe Southwest Airlines and Holiday Inn both settled. The current one is Target http://www.jimthatcher.com/law-target.htm. I feel, maybe incorrectly, that current law suits at least in the US are brought against large big name organizations for a reason. The importance of Target has to do with the American with Disabilities Act and the question whether this law has to expand to include the virtual world has to adhere to the same accessibility standards as the brick and mortar world. Nancy On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Rick Lecoat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 21 Aug 2008, at 17:56, Jon Warner wrote: If I hosted a party, of course I would do my best to accommodate everyone's needs but to receive a court summons several days later because i had not installed a wheelchair ramp, for example, is surely wrong. The wheelchair ramp analogy, whilst not perfect, is a useful one I think. To refer to the example you used, I don't see that anyone would expect you to install a wheelchair ramp for the sake of a one-off private party (although if you invited your wheelchair-using friends they might get a bit p**sed off if you hadn't catered for them). I guess the equivalent of that on the internet is a personal site or blog which, whilst existing on the public internet, makes no attempt to provide content aimed at the wider public, and is simply a vanity site of one sort or another. However, a site that provides a service to the wider public (be that in the form of information, professional debate, selling a product or service, or anything else like that), then the analogous 'real world' experience would be that of a shop or library or seminar venue not installing a ramp, and that of course is a very different situation because the service provided has an implied invitation to the public as a whole. To use your party analogy, the private party would be a nightclub open to all-comers; whether they have to pay to enjoy the service is immaterial, the implied invitation to the public is there. In the vanity site situation I guess that the more personal the site content the harder it would be to bring discrimination case (though I /suppose/ that someone could argue -- just -- that they were desperately interested in what you had for breakfast and that since the site is on the public internet they have a right to be able to access it); with the second situation, however, the 'service offered to the public' aspect means that the potential for a law suit is very clear. Just my take. -- Rick Lecoat www.sharkattack.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee On Aug 15, 2008, at 9:07 PM, Elizabeth Spiegel wrote: Hi Tee In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, although there has only been one successful suit to date. Bruce Maguire was awarded damages of $20,000 against SOCOG in 2000: full details here: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/decisions/comdec/2000/DD000120.htm Note that the target was not by any measure a 'small business'. HREOC provides advisory notes http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.html *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
Section 508 is a minimum standard required for Websites of US Government contractors, etc. and so has been adopted by many other Websites too. It is not law, as such. Disability Discrimination legislation in Europe, the US and Oceania are all very similar and require Website owners to take reasonable steps to ensure their sites are accessible by disabled users. The WCAG standards are the ones expected to be used in any law suits as a test of accessibility. The legislation doesn´t specify a level of accessibility, just that reasonable steps are taken, which is why there have not been too many prosecutions. The test of reasonableness is vague and what is reasonable for a large corporation to do may not be reasonable for a small business. On Sun, August 17, 2008 3:18 pm, tee wrote: Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee On Aug 15, 2008, at 9:07 PM, Elizabeth Spiegel wrote: Hi Tee In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, although there has only been one successful suit to date. Bruce Maguire was awarded damages of $20,000 against SOCOG in 2000: full details here: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/decisions/comdec/2000/DD000120.htm Note that the target was not by any measure a 'small business'. HREOC provides advisory notes http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.html *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:18 AM, tee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee Tee, the Disability Discrimination Act (here in Oz) does not actually specify the level of compliance according to WCAG. HREOC and AGIMO (google these) make some interpretations of the Act that are again interpreted by individual government bodies - I think it is fair to say that accessibility standards in Australia aren't (standard). Cheers, Andrew -- --- Andrew Boyd http://onblogging.com.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
Thats correct Andrew, I had to investigate this for a redesign of a federal government web site. Government departments and agencies in Australia are at the mercy of the law, but as Andrew stated the level of compliance is measured against a persons assessment of the level of discrimination they feel is being placed on them. The examples that I know of have been assessed to the level where the person making the complaint is deemed being discriminated against. If this person in not satisfied with the solution made by the organisation they can continue to push the case forward till the issue is resolved and during this period the organisation is fined along the way. However for commercial organisations, if they are not providing a service where they are the sole provider and access point, the lines get fuzzy on what is and is not disciminatory. William Andrew Boyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:18 AM, tee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee Tee, the Disability Discrimination Act (here in Oz) does not actually specify the level of compliance according to WCAG. HREOC and AGIMO (google these) make some interpretations of the Act that are again interpreted by individual government bodies - I think it is fair to say that accessibility standards in Australia aren't (standard). Cheers, Andrew -- --- Andrew Boyd http://onblogging.com.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
The AGIMO guidelines specify minimum A, preferably AA. http://webpublishing.agimo.gov.au/Accessibility From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Boyd Sent: Monday, 18 August 2008 8:58 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:18 AM, tee [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee Tee, the Disability Discrimination Act (here in Oz) does not actually specify the level of compliance according to WCAG. HREOC and AGIMO (google these) make some interpretations of the Act that are again interpreted by individual government bodies - I think it is fair to say that accessibility standards in Australia aren't (standard). Cheers, Andrew -- --- Andrew Boyd http://onblogging.com.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** WARNING: The information contained in this email may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use or copying of any part of this information is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, we apologise for any inconvenience and request that you notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this email, together with any attachments. *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
You'd think AGIMO would validate their pages wouldn't you? Phil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Vickery Sent: Monday, 18 August 2008 10:41 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] The AGIMO guidelines specify minimum A, preferably AA. http://webpublishing.agimo.gov.au/Accessibility From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Boyd Sent: Monday, 18 August 2008 8:58 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:18 AM, tee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the info, Elizabeth. Aussie members in this list must be very proud of this law :-) Let's just hope no gold-digger lawyer sees an opportunity there! Is the requirement for this law higher per WCAG guidelines (A, AA, or AAA)? For example, Section 508 is really low standard in my opinion. tee Tee, the Disability Discrimination Act (here in Oz) does not actually specify the level of compliance according to WCAG. HREOC and AGIMO (google these) make some interpretations of the Act that are again interpreted by individual government bodies - I think it is fair to say that accessibility standards in Australia aren't (standard). Cheers, Andrew -- --- Andrew Boyd http://onblogging.com.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** WARNING: The information contained in this email may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use or copying of any part of this information is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, we apologise for any inconvenience and request that you notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this email, together with any attachments. *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, Wow! Idon't think ours are (UK) Keep it quiet, It does'nt take much here to start a lawsuit. I think most webmaster/ess would follow the Disability code of practice anyway. And, if there is anything about you -- you would want your site accessable by all., after all you all work hard enough on them. Kate - Original Message - From: Elizabeth Spiegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 5:07 AM Subject: RE: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites Hi Tee In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, although there has only been one successful suit to date. Bruce Maguire was awarded damages of $20,000 against SOCOG in 2000: full details here: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/decisions/comdec/2000/DD000120.htm Note that the target was not by any measure a 'small business'. HREOC provides advisory notes http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.html Elizabeth Spiegel Web editing 0409 986 158 GPO Box 729, Hobart TAS 7001 www.spiegelweb.com.au -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tee Sent: Friday, 15 August 2008 12:49 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Shopping cart - who does what Under British law, can individual who brings a case under the DDA and the lawyer seek monetary compensation? Couple months ago a handful of ADA lawsuits handled by a same lawyer. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/13/carollloyd.DTLh w=disability+lawsuitsn=001sc=1000 If lawyer and plaintiff can seek monetary compensation, I honestly hope no ADA/DDA law ever applies to website. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
kate wrote: In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, Wow! Idon't think ours are (UK) Yes, they are. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
Oh are they Patrick? Your so knowledgable its frightening...hehehe Thanks Kate http://jungaling.com/Malaysia/ - Original Message - From: Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites kate wrote: In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, Wow! Idon't think ours are (UK) Yes, they are. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Lawsuits for inaccessible websites
Hi Elizabeth, true, there has only been one successful litigation action. The people behind a certain Grocery site might be getting a little nervous at the moment :) What worries me is that there are many larger government sites in Australia that are a lot less accessible than that one... I wonder how long it will take for this particular dagger to fall? I have no doubt that fall it will - a question of when not if. Cheers, Andrew On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Elizabeth Spiegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Tee In Australia, websites are covered by Disability Discrimination legislation, although there has only been one successful suit to date. Bruce Maguire was awarded damages of $20,000 against SOCOG in 2000: full details here: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/decisions/comdec/2000/DD000120.htm Note that the target was not by any measure a 'small business'. HREOC provides advisory notes http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/standards/www_3/www_3.html Elizabeth Spiegel Web editing 0409 986 158 GPO Box 729, Hobart TAS 7001 www.spiegelweb.com.au -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tee Sent: Friday, 15 August 2008 12:49 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Shopping cart - who does what Under British law, can individual who brings a case under the DDA and the lawyer seek monetary compensation? Couple months ago a handful of ADA lawsuits handled by a same lawyer. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/13/carollloyd.DTLh w=disability+lawsuitsn=001sc=1000http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/13/carollloyd.DTLhw=disability+lawsuitsn=001sc=1000 If lawyer and plaintiff can seek monetary compensation, I honestly hope no ADA/DDA law ever applies to website. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- --- Andrew Boyd http://onblogging.com.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
