Accessibility Case Against Target.com Not Dismissed
UPDATE: Joe Clark in the comments was right. Too many negatives got me confused. Target’s motion to dismiss the case was rejected. The case is proceeding.
Thanks Joe.
In February of this year, a lawsuit was filed against our own Target.com for being inaccessible:
Well. The motion to dismiss the case was thrown out of US District Court in California last week.
As Darrel has said many times – accessibility helps all of us. Especially as more and more of us expect to conduct transactions on devices other than desktop or laptop computers.
6 Comments
Your report is false. The case was not dismissed. Target’s motion to dismiss the case was rejected.
this is all good, but it’s still focusing on blind users and blind users only, which, IMHO, clouds the intent of accessibility even more.
Is this an idication of some of the fall-out from the case?
This is heading down a slippery slope. This lawsuit opens too many doors. (some good, some not so good)
TaulPaul-
Granted I’d rather see companies see accesibilty as not “another hassle” and see it as competitive advantage by having a larger market. (I believe there are 161 million blind people in the world). But if big business can’t do the right thin, why shouldn’t they be held accountable. But as a recent post over at slashdot about the RIAA lawsuits mentions:
“Lawyers are just like any other people. There are good people and bad people. The people who come out the strongest against ‘trial lawyers’ are the big corporations’ PR departments. They want the ‘common folk’ to think ill of lawyers, because the law — as imperfect as it is — is the only equalizer left. And it’s being eroded rapidly. And people dissing lawyers all the time helps that process. ”
I’d rather have these companies held to it. I’ve gotten blue in the face trying to convince our developers to be mindfull of this, the only thing that convices companies that they need to do it is $$$ reasons.
“This is heading down a slippery slope.”
I don’t think so. The ‘slippery slope’ argument is always brought up when accessibility is mentioned, but it’s more FUD than serious concern.
Unfortunately, corporations and web firms aren’t paying attention to standard best practices. If they were, perhaps legislation/the courts wouldn’t be needed.
“the only thing that convices companies that they need to do it is $$$ reasons.”
Sad, but true. Now if we can only convince companies that $$$ in the pocket (by ACCOMODATING their customers) Is a better incentive than fearing $$$ out of pocket (lawsuits). Seems like an obvious comparision to me, but, clearly, not so much to corporations.