[thelist] Does the Americans with Disabilities, ADA, act pertain to Internet Content?

[Benjamin]

At 12:01 PM 10/7/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Which is what this is about:
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/10/06/2340204.shtml?tid=103
>
>Test cases are necessary, and they have to go to a verdict
>before you get precedent.
>
>I, for one, am rather hoping that this scores.  The spirit
>of the law in this case is clear.  The letter supports
>that interpretation when/if a court cements a precedent.


I've read the article but didn't see too much mention about where this
starts and stops in regards to site/ownership size.  It's one thing for the
government to have to adhere to something like this but having legislation
mandating that I make my personal site "visible" to a blind person is too
much (and my grandmother was blind prior to her death).

Especially in this case it seems ridiculous since there are viable
alternative modes of gaining the same information that are equally viable,
such as using a telephone and calling the airlines.

This isn't the proper forum for it most likely but I believe it must be
said; the Internet, as it stands today, is primarily a visual medium.  This
law is, in my opinion, akin to someone who is deaf suing the RIAA because
they are unable to hear the music on a CD they just bought (although in
this case I wish they would.. the riaa are, well I'll be nice and not say).

On a side note, at least this would do away with moronic flash only sites.

-benjamin