Court says California Disabled Rights Law applies to the web

Tech News

By Steve Ragan Oct 4, 2007, 15:30 GMT

Marilyn Hall Patel, a U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California judge, issued two landmark decisions Monday, in a nationwide class action against Target Corporation. First, the court certified the case as a class action on behalf of blind Internet users throughout the country, under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Second, the court held that Web sites such as target.com are required by California law to be accessible to persons with disabilities. The ruling was issued in a case brought by the National Federation of the Blind (NFB). The suit charges that Target failed and refused to make its Web site (www.target.com) accessible to the blind and, therefore, violated the ADA, as well as two California civil rights statutes: the California Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Disabled Persons Act. The court agreed, and granted the motion to certify a nationwide class under the ADA for injunctive relief. The court also granted the motion to certify a California subclass for both injunctive relief and statutory minimum damages. Target’s motion for summary judgment was denied. “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. All e-commerce businesses should take note of this decision and immediately take steps to open their doors to the blind,” said President of the National Federation of the Blind, Dr. Marc Maurer. “Target Corporation has led a battle against blind consumers in a key area of modern life: the Internet economy. The court’s decision today makes clear that people with disabilities no longer can be treated as second-class citizens in any sphere of mainstream life. This ruling will benefit hundreds of thousands of Americans with disabilities,” added Larry Paradis of Disability Rights Advocates. Disability Rights Advocates (www.dralegal.org), Brown, Goldstein & Levy (www.browngold.com), Schneider & Wallace (www.schneiderwallace.com), and Peter Blanck, chairman of the Burton Blatt Institute and university professor at Syracuse University (www.bbi.syr.edu) were all certified as council in the suit. More information is available at their websites.

Talkback

Add your comment (no registration required)

page: 1

Damned LiberalOct 5th, 2007 - 02:31:43

why did Target even challenge this? how much could it have cost to simply 'do the right thing' rather than be judged, fined and now besmirched as the clear 'losers' who were only thinking of corporate profits over INCREASING corporate profits? seriously, think of how much positive news agreeing to the lawsuit would have generated. think of the increased sales from the blind AROUND THE COUNTRY. would the cost of one-time implementation of such software TRULY outweigh the combined costs of: fighting this in court with teams of corporate (read $500 per hour each plus expenses), having to pay the penalties they now owe both the blind who filed AND the state of California, and still having to now by court order fix www.Target.com to be in compliance? sheer, unmitigated arrogance on Target's part. a foolish, costly decision. well-deserved, i hope every dime makes Tar-Jay suffer as much as the handicapped who had to go through such a painful lawsuit. justice in this case was served, and Target? you got SERVED, baby. choke on THAT chinese made import! ;)

Report this comment

page: 1

Add your comment (no registration required)

Tech

Court says California Disabled Rights Law applies to the web

Tech News

Talkback

Latest Headlines in Tech

Latest Articles on The Tech Herald

In Monsters and Critics

Corporate

The Fine Print