|

By Laura Parker
October 26, 2006
Bruce Sexton is blind. He would like to shop on Target's website,
but says he can't "read" it. He says the site lacks certain
coding — found on many other websites — that would activate
software to allow blind computer users to hear audio descriptions
of what is on Internet pages.
Sexton, 24, who lives in Berkeley, Calif., and the National
Federation of the Blind are suing Target on behalf of the 1.3
million blind people in the USA. The suit alleges that the giant
retailer discriminates against the visually impaired by violating
state and federal laws that protect the disabled.
The case draws national attention because it could have
implications for virtually every retailer and business in the USA
that operates a website. The case also fuels a wider debate
starting to play out in courtrooms: whether anti-discrimination
laws apply to the Internet.
It's a key question in lawsuits across the nation.
Craigslist.org, a popular advertising and networking website, is
being sued in federal court in Chicago over allegations it has
allowed ads for apartments and other housing that discriminate on
the basis of race, sex, class, religion or familial status.
In court papers, Craigslist argues it is protected by the federal
law that protects website owners from liability for content
posted by the sites' users. Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster has
said it would be impossible for the site's staff to review the 2
million free housing ads posted to the site each month. A hearing
in the case is scheduled for Nov. 13.
In the Target case, the retailer contends that the federal
Americans with Disabilities Act and two California laws cited by
Sexton apply only to its brick-and-mortar stores and do not
extend to the Internet.
Last month, a federal judge disagreed with Target and rejected
its bid to dismiss the suit. The case is proceeding toward trial,
but no court date has been set.
The recent ruling was "very significant," says Brian Blair, an
Orlando lawyer who specializes in defending companies accused of
violating laws that protect people with disabilities.
"For any business that has a physical location and a website,
(the ruling) says you need to take reasonable steps to permit
accessibility for the disabled," says Blair, who is not involved
in the dispute.
Blind or visually impaired people are able to use the Internet by
installing "reader" software on their computers that searches for
codes embedded on websites.
The codes enable text and graphics to be read or described
audibly. The software also lets the blind navigate sites by using
keystrokes instead of a mouse. Such functions have not been
available to blind users of target.com, court papers say. Because
Target's website has required the use of a mouse, blind customers
have been unable to make purchases on the site.
Target.com has "thousands of access barriers that make it
difficult, if not impossible, for blind customers" to use the
site, the suit says.
The Americans with Disabilities Act requires stores, restaurants
and other businesses to provide access to people with mental and
physical disabilities. Since the Internet emerged, several
lawsuits have focused on what site owners should be required to
do to make their pages accessible to the disabled.
A lawsuit filed by the National Federation of the Blind against
America Online in 1999 was dropped after AOL agreed to design new
versions of its software to accommodate disabled users.
In 2002, Southwest Airlines fended off a similar challenge after
a Miami judge found that federal disability law did not apply to
the airline's website because a "virtual" ticket counter is not a
physical place. Southwest's Brandy King says the airline opposed
the lawsuit because it believed its website complied with federal
disability law. Since then, she says, Southwest has added more
coding to the site to help the blind.
Andrew Langer, manager of regulatory policy for the National
Federation of Independent Business in Washington, said the cost
of changing a website to accommodate disabled viewers often is
not significant for large companies. He said companies often
fight such lawsuits for philosophical reasons.
Businesses want to attract customers, he says, "but they want to
do it on their own terms. You want to make decisions for your
business without being coerced."
Langer says that as retailers get more savvy about the Internet,
"more are going to be making sure their websites are readily
accessible to the blind," he says.
Carolyn Brookter, a Target spokeswoman, declined to discuss the
lawsuit. In an e-mailed statement, Brookter said the retailer is
"making online enhancements that will benefit all our guests,
including those with disabilities." She added that "one of the
things the enhancements will do is further increase the usability
of the website for guests with sight disabilities." She did not
elaborate or say when the changes would be made.
Sexton says he visited Target's site two weeks ago to see whether
it had been improved. "They've made some minor changes," he says.
"But they haven't made it an easy or enjoyable experience for
me."
|