|
Is Your Website Accessible to All?
By Thomas
R. Burke
[October 2007]
A federal court in San Francisco has certified a national class
action lawsuit against Target Corporation for allegedly violating
California and federal law by failing to make its website, Target.com,
accessible to the blind. The lawsuit, filed by the National
Federation of the Blind on behalf of one of its members in Northern
California, alleges that the national retailer failed to enable
its website to use screen-reading technology that allows blind
users to access Target.com by having the content of a Web page
audibly read to them. The plaintiffs contend they are denied
“full and equal access” to Target’s 1,400
retail stores because they cannot readily access online, product
and sales information that is used to make purchases in Target’s
retail stores. Last year, the court dismissed claims brought
by the plaintiffs that were based exclusively on features of
the website unconnected to Target’s physical stores. “Brick
and mortar” businesses that operate websites used by consumers
to browse services or products that can be purchased at a physical
location (e.g., a retail store) should pay particular attention
to this ruling.
Since the lawsuit was filed, Target has modified its website
to improve access, but these efforts did not render the case
moot or preclude U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel from
approving a class action of “all legally blind individuals
in the United States who have attempted to access Target.com
and as a result have been denied access to the enjoyment of
goods and services offered in Target stores.” In its Sept.
28, 2007 order, the court focused on the alleged “increased
time and expense incurred during in-store shopping as a result
of the inaccessibility” of the retailer’s website.
Rejecting Target’s contention that equal convenience
is not required by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), the court noted: “A wheelchair user is not prohibited
from entering a store without a ramp: that person could be carried
into the store by the store personnel or hire a guide to do
so. Nevertheless, those accessibility barriers, even where they
may be accommodated, would generally violate the ADA. Similarly,
the increased cost and time to surmount the alleged barriers
presented by the inability to pre-shop demonstrate that these
declarants have met the class definition. Target’s reliance
upon their ability to accommodate blind shoppers through other
means, such as in-store assistance or a 1-800 customer service
number is misplaced at this stage.” (See page 12 of the
court’s order.)
Target denies that it has violated federal and state disabilities
laws and vows to continue to implement “new technologies
to enhance the usability of our web site for all our guests.”
Nor is the class certification ruling a decision on the merits
of the case. Nevertheless, the court’s ruling highlights
an issue that most eCommerce websites routinely overlook: the
accessibility of their website to persons with disabilities.
For millions of individuals—one-fifth of the U.S. population
has some form of disability—the Internet can be a frustrating
place. But it doesn’t have to be that way. Persons with
hearing impairments can use closed captioning technology. Screen
magnifiers and screen-reader technology can convert words on
a website into a computer-generated voice. Websites that closely
group links can be redesigned to help those with poor hand-eye
coordination.
Owners of websites can take several practical steps to make
a website more accessible:
First, using a tool available through the Center for Applied
Special Technology (www.cast.org/bobby),
any website can, in seconds, be evaluated for its compliance
with the accessibility guidelines established by the World Wide
Web Consortium’s Web Accessibility Initiative.
Second, websites can be designed (or redesigned) to be compatible
with screen-reader and other accessibility technologies. Text
that describes features available on a site can be added allowing
the website to be “read” by the visitor. Both PDF
documents and HTML versions of documents can be made available
to site users; captions can be added to photographs appearing
on the site. Closed captioning can be included for users with
hearing disabilities. Sites that feature heavily clustered links
to content—making it difficult for users to click on the
links—can be redesigned to allow users to more easily
navigate the site.
Third, a website can post “access instructions”
on the home page: a description of the accessibility measures
used by the site. See for example, the website operated by the
City of San Jose, California: www.sanjoseca.gov/access.html.
Other accessibility resources are available through www.webAIM.org
and www.w3.org.
Whether all websites must be compliant with federal and state
accessibility laws remains to be seen. In the meantime, website
owners who make their sites more accessible can gain new customers
in the process.
For more information, please contact:
 |
Thomas
R. Burke is a partner in DWT's San Francisco office.
His Internet practice focuses on all aspects of Internet
liability issues. Mr. Burke is the author of "Disabilities
and Internet Site Design," published in Internet
Law & Practice (Thomson/West 2002). He may be reached
at thomasburke@dwt.com
or at (415) 276-6552. |
This advisory
is a publication of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. Our purpose in
publishing this advisory is to inform our clients and friends
of recent legal developments. It is not intended, nor should
it be used, as a substitute for specific legal advice as legal
counsel may be given only in response to inquiries regarding
particular situations.
Copyright © 2007, Davis Wright
Tremaine LLP.
return
to bulletins main page |
