E-mail List Archives

Re: NAD v. Netflix: "This is a bad ruling. Reallyterrible."

for

From: Kroon, Kurtis@FTB
Date: Jun 28, 2012 11:06AM


-----Original Message-----
From: John E Brandt [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 14:06
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] NAD v. Netflix: "This is a bad ruling.
Reallyterrible."

<snip>

"Update: Although I believe the statute and case law make it clear that
ADA
does not apply to websites, I also believe that responsible websites
should
voluntarily undertake extra efforts to accommodate users with
disabilities.
In many cases, doing so will actually increase profits by expanding the
userbase; and even where it isn't, it's a good business decision both as
a
matter of corporate ethics and for providing extra utility to all
users."

Not exactly sure what that means...


[KK] Here's how I would paraphrase it:

*I* don't think the ADA applies to websites, but that doesn't matter.
We should make our websites accessible because:

* Customers with disabilities do have money. If our site is more
accessible than our competitors', they are more likely to spend their
money *with us*.
* It even helps customers who don't have disabilities.
* It's the right thing to do.

<end paraphrase>

Regards,

Kurtis
California Franchise Tax Board

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email from the State of California is for the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review or use, including disclosure or distribution, is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this email.