[thelist] targeting effectively

[Erik Mattheis]

The people here that are insisting that it's wreckless and bad
business to make a non accessible website (because of a disability or
or missing browser features) probably just can't imagine what it's
like doing independent contracting for small businesses. You hear a
lot of stuff like: "We have $4000 for this project and this is what
we want it to do."

It sounds like the solution some would suggest is to only do the
accessible version that will work pretty much everywhere ... great if
that decision is yours ... but independent contractors can't make
that decision ... we're paid to do the tasks people hire us to do.

It's been suggested that I could be held liable for making an
inaccessible website ... seems I'm covered by paragraph 8:

"8. WARRANTIES AND LIABILITY.  Gozz does not warrant that the
functions of the web site will meet the client's expectations of site
traffic or resulting business.  The service is distributed on an "as
is" basis without warranties of any kind, either express or implied,
including but not limited to warranties of title or implied
warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or
otherwise.  In no event will Gozz or its sub-contractors be liable to
any client or any third party for any direct, indirect, incidental,
special or consequential damages arising out of use of the service or
inability to use the service or out of any breach of any warranty,
even if Gozz has been advised in advance of the possibility of such
damages."

PS - Here's an interesting case that's just as or probably more
applicable to this discussion than Sydney - someone (unsuccessfully)
suing a private website under the ADA:

http://www.google.com/search?q=OKbridge+ADA

--

__________________________________________
- Erik Mattheis

(612) 377 2272
http://goZz.com/

__________________________________________