[nfb-talk] observations on the Target case

Sat Oct 6 14:46:03 CDT 2007

Not to mention that Tar-Get ignored the Constitution of the United
States and all the laws passed by the Congress regulating Interstate
commerce.  For if internet commerce is not interstate commerce, nothing
is interstate commerce. 

William

-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On Behalf Of mhingson
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 10:15 AM
To: 'NFB Talk Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] observations on the Target case

Wow!  I am a bit lost by some of the comments on this subject.

	First, why is Target's site accessible now?  It is because the
NFB
took Target to court.  We have known for some time that Target was
quietly
making changes.  ALL THOSE CHANGES HAPPENED AFTER WE TOOK THEM TO COURT.

Target attempted to flaunt  its perceived power by defying the law, at
least
the case law of accessibility.  The 
Federation caught them and began an action to get target to be an
inclusive
store.  So, why is the sight accessible, because we the blind of the
nation
brought it about by action, not for any other reason.

	Second, so what is to guarantee that Target will keep its sight
accessible?  More important, why did we have to go through a legal
action if
Target really wanted blind people as shoppers?

The fact is that it doesn't matter whether or not the site is now
accessible.  What matters is that Target must realize that blind people
are
part of the consumer force, and a force in our own right to be reckoned
with.

Even if Target now has the most accessible sight, they should pay for
being
compelled for making it so.  They perpetrated a criminal act against all
blind people, even the courts have now said so.

There is no magic here.  Target must acknowledge what it did and it must
pay
as well..

Michael Hingson,
For information on Michael's speaking topics and speaking availability
please visit <http://www.michaelhingson.com> 
For information on Guide Dogs for the Blind please visit
<http://www.guidedogs.com> 
-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On
Behalf Of Buddy Brannan
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 5:14 AM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] CA Target case gets class action status!

Except that the site *is* accessible now. I was just shopping on it a
month
o six week ago with no difficulty.
On Oct 5, 2007, at 7:45 AM, Chris Westbrook wrote:

> Just curious why there isn't a response from hte federation to 
> Target's claim that there site is now accessible and NFB says so.  We 
> can't let something like that stand.  That just makes us look stupid.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Andrews" <dandrews at visi.com>
> To: <blindtlk at nfbnet.org>; <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>; <nfb- 
> announce at nfbnet.org>; <nfb-web at nfbnet.org>; <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>; 
> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>; <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>; <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 11:56 PM
> Subject: [nfb-talk] CA Target case gets class action status!
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> SOURCE: Wall Street Journal
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suit Against Target Over Access By Blind Gets Class-Action
>>> Status
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By KEVIN KINGSBURY
>>>> October 3, 2007 1:08 p.m.
>>>>
>>>> A federal judge granted class-action status to a lawsuit alleging
>>> that
>>>> Target
>>> <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=tgt>
>>> Corp.
>>>> is breaking California and federal law by making its Web site
>>> essentially
>>>> unusable for the blind.
>>>>
>>>> The plaintiffs have said there is technology that has been
>>> adopted by
>>> other
>>>> firms to make Web sites usable for the blind, but Target hasn't
>>> done so.
>>>> Reading software can vocalize invisible code embedded beneath
>>> computer
>>>> graphics and describe content on a Web page.
>>>>
>>>> Granting class-action status allows blind people throughout the
>>> country
>>> who
>>>> have tried to access Target.com to become plaintiffs in the suit,
>>> which
>>>> alleges violations with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
>>>>
>>>> Judge Marilyn Hall Patel also approved a separate class made up
>>> of
>>>> California blind residents who have tried to access Target.com to
>>> address
>>>> the suit's charges that Target is violating state civil- and
>>> disabled-rights
>>>> laws. The suit contends some 10,000 people in California alone
>>> use reading
>>>> software to access the Internet.
>>>>
>>>> "This is a tremendous step forward for blind people throughout
>>> the country
>>>> who for too long have been denied equal access to the Internet
>>> economy,
>>> said
>>>> Dr. Marc Maurer, president of the National Federation of the
>>> Blind. "All
>>>> e-commerce businesses should take note of this decision and
>>> immediately
>>> take
>>>> steps to open their doors to the blind."
>>>>
>>>> Judge Patel noted in her ruling, dated Friday, that Target has
>>> made some
>>>> modifications to its Web site since the suit's filing in early
>>> 2006 to
>>> make
>>>> the site more blind-accessible. With those changes, Target
>>> claimed the
>>> suit
>>>> is now moot. Judge Patel ruled against that argument.
>>>>
>>>> In a statement, Target said, "We believe that our Web site is
>>> fully
>>>> accessible and complies with all applicable laws. As our online
>>> business
>>> has
>>>> evolved, we have made significant enhancements to improve the
>>> experience
>>> of
>>>> our guests who use assistive technologies." The company also
>>> noted a
>>>> federation email "confirms the usability of our Web site."
>>>>
>>>> The retailer will appeal the class-action certification and said,
>>> "We will
>>>> continue to implement new technologies the enhance the usability
>>> of our
>>> Web
>>>> site for all our guests."
>>>>
>>>> The federation filed the suit, originally made in California
>>> state court
>>> in
>>>> February 2006 and moved at Target's request to San Francisco
>>> federal court
>>>> the following month, on behalf of northern California resident
>>> Bruce
>>> Sexton,
>>>> a group member. The suit alleged that "due to Target's failure
>>> and refusal
>>>> to remove access barriers to Target.com, blind individuals have
>>> been and
>>> are
>>>> being denied equal access to Target stores" and the "service and
>>> benefits
>>>> offered to the public through Target.com."
>>>>
>>>> Judge Patel ruled that Mr. Sexton hasn't demonstrated he himself
>>> has been
>>>> harmed by Target, but that some potential class members could
>>> likely may
>>> the
>>>> same allegations as Mr. Sexton. As a result, a new class
>>> representative
>>> must
>>>> be found.
>>>>
>>>> Write to Kevin Kingsbury at kevin.kingsbury at dowjones.com
>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>
>> __________ NOD32 2573 (20071005) Information __________
>>
>> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk

--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
Phone: (814) 746-4502 or 888-75-BUDDY
Check out some of the best music you've never heard, and claim your free
trial platinum mmembership: http://www.musicforte.com/trial/ bbrannan
Check
out the new Watkins: natural plant-based home care and our 2007 holiday
gift
line: http://www.tastyshop.net And claim your free mall: Unlimited
earning
potential just for the  
shopping you already do: http://www.powermall.info	

_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk

_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk