- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: People are using the ADA to sue companies for apps/sites that discriminate
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
I'm tall and I'm uncomfortable on airplanes. I should be upgraded to first class for free (or via taxpayer $) on every flight, because I pay the same price and should have the same level of comfort on the plane as someone who is average height.
Anything less than total equality is discriminatory.
Anything less than total equality is discriminatory.
0
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
As far as I know, to be ADA compliant, you have to have more words than pics on your website, so the software can read it.
Like, on Dominos and even TD ads, there are words within the pics that the software cannot read.
I have had several in my industry receive the calls or letters from the ADA attorneys. Pretty simple fix imo for a small business. I am sure Domino's website updates are much more expensive though.
Like, on Dominos and even TD ads, there are words within the pics that the software cannot read.
I have had several in my industry receive the calls or letters from the ADA attorneys. Pretty simple fix imo for a small business. I am sure Domino's website updates are much more expensive though.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:26 pm to Golfer
quote:
20/20 did a story on these ADA firms a few years ago where they "hire" disabled people to go "look" for minor violations of small businesses, then sue them for whatever assets they did have.
i will wager some real money the plaintiff in OP is a plant by an ADA firm
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:31 pm to CarRamrod
The ADA argument has also rolled into academia and the usage of video for online courses.
It essentially pushes faculty to either transcribe everything for their online courses or to stop using video as a teaching mediums.
I teach at a top 25 mba program for a variety of online courses and it will radically change how I prepare my content and how I am willing to disseminate it to my students.
It hasn’t been decreed as required so far, only strongly encouraged, but the writing is on the wall.
It essentially pushes faculty to either transcribe everything for their online courses or to stop using video as a teaching mediums.
I teach at a top 25 mba program for a variety of online courses and it will radically change how I prepare my content and how I am willing to disseminate it to my students.
It hasn’t been decreed as required so far, only strongly encouraged, but the writing is on the wall.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i will wager some real money the plaintiff in OP is a plant by an ADA firm
They usually are with petty shite like this.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:34 pm to laxtonto
quote:
The ADA argument has also rolled into academia and the usage of video for online courses.
i think i posted a link about this a few years ago
free online offerings from major schools had to be taken down b/c they weren't transcribed
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
I'm surprised the obese haven't filed suit against airlines. Obese people get disability checks so that means they are disabled. They can get on planes by purchasing 2 seats (3 in the case of 700 pounders). But they cannot get into the plane's bathroom.
Several times on My 600 Pound Life they whine about peeing in their pants during the flight to Houston to see Dr. Now.
Several times on My 600 Pound Life they whine about peeing in their pants during the flight to Houston to see Dr. Now.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:42 pm to BRBurgerboy
quote:
Or he could just pick up the phone and call
Exactly. They have a method that blind people can use already. The CHOSE to use another method that is used by non-blind people and then complain.
That is no different than a wheelchair bound person refusing to use the elevator, and then demanding that we make the stairs wheelchair accessible. It’s mind numbing.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Guillermo Robles, who is blind, has tried to order a custom pizza from Domino’s at least twice in recent years, using the company’s website and mobile app.
He can't use the phone feature of his phone to call Domino's and tell them what he wants?
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:46 pm to SSpaniel
quote:
He can't use the phone feature of his phone to call Domino's and tell them what he wants?
Of course he can, but that's not the point of his lawsuit, or more accurately the legal firm representing him.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:55 pm to BRBurgerboy
quote:
Or he could just pick up the phone and call
Yeah, but then he wouldn't be able to play the victim.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
I guess every printed book should include a section of Braille in case a blind person should pick it up.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
The ADA requires reasonable accommodations when possible. It does not require companies to do things that are going to negatively impact them with undue costs that aren't reasonable.
The ADA is an important law, but many people including judges, don't seem to understand it at all.
The ADA is an important law, but many people including judges, don't seem to understand it at all.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:37 pm to Geauxgurt
quote:bullshite
It does not require companies to do things that are going to negatively impact them with undue costs that aren't reasonable.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:42 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
I’m not familiar with the type of software mentioned in the article.
Is it simply an issue of Dominoes making their website compliant such that reading software is compatible with it?
I'm in Healthcare, and this is a huge problem for us. We've been hit several times for not being compliant, and considering we're a giant corporation we have risk everywhere.
Our standards are to be WCAG 2.1 AA compliant. And it has cost us millions to do the work we've completed to date.
Had to hire multiple resources internally and hire vendors that charge a fortune to remediate every website and digital asset (even pdfs, word docs, videos, etc). Ridiculous the things we have to do.
This post was edited on 7/25/19 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
If they can't fix blindness,
They have no kindness...
They have no kindness...
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:45 pm to Geauxtiga
quote:
bullshite
That's not bullshite. That is the letter of the law and how it was furthermore interpreted.
This plaintiff, his lawyers and the idiotic judge are going beyond the purview of the law and its intentions.
In this case, the plaintiff can get their pizzas by calling in which is not an undue burden on them.
Yes, it is a pain to make sure buildings and rooms are ADA accessible at times, but those are usually reasonable so the person is able to access the facility, business or institution. There is no other reasonable way for them to do so independently.
In cases like this, there are multiple alternatives available to the plaintiff, but he is choosing to ignore them.
That was my point.
The judge is a complete moron in this case.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:48 pm to Geauxgurt
Sounds like they are trying to expand the rights, similar to what was granted under Section 1557.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
Filing lawsuits on the basis of ADA violations is a huge business. Both the plaintiffs and attorneys make tons of money doing this and quite often put companies out of business (particularly small businesses).
There should be no monetary awards in these suits.
There should be no monetary awards in these suits.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:54 pm to frankthetank
quote:
Sounds like they are trying to expand the rights, similar to what was granted under Section 1557.
Which is beyond what the law was designed for and should be shut down by any reasonable and logical judge following the law.
It is designed to provide reasonable access in some form to those with disabilities. It is not designed to make everything fit for every possible disability.
This is basically another form of legislation through judicial means. It's sad and pathetic and honestly is the result of abusing the legal system to force through so many things that never should've been accomplished that way.
There is no such existence where fairness, justice, and equality can co-exist all in perfection. You have to always diminish one in an effort to get the other in the real world.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News