[blindLaw] Taking legal action to use text to speech with lsat prep questions and materials to facilitate equal access in test prep with other able body students

Sat Apr 6 06:23:52 UTC 2024

Omar: 

A number of procedural and logistical questions come up. Let me know if you'd be interested in speaking briefly off-list. 

Sanho 

> On Apr 6, 2024, at 12:11 AM, omar duncan via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Revision further below:
> 
> 
> I’m sending the same email as above that I sent earlier, except I forgot to
> provide a subject in the email above.
> 
> The subject is very important for understanding the purpose of the email
> and I want to allow you everyone  to understand:
> 
> 
> I further want to indicate that I will be long done with my test
> preparation by the time any of this stuff for to theoretically be
> adjudicated and does not personally affect me.
> 
> I’m just passionate about helping others have an equal opportunity and want
> to call us all of our resources And fight this important fight fiercely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We gotta get our big guns and take them to the blinding light of Justice
> and Make these discriminatory little bastards wish they had not clung on to
> such erroneous grounds to inhibit our progress as disabled Americans.
> 
> 
> Excuse the vociferous language but the facts are the facts and we must
> aggressively push forward for a just future like our righteous predecessors
> before us.
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> ———————————————————-
> 
> 
> “
> 
> Dear colleagues (legal professionals and aspiring legal professionals), I
> have something critical for our career prep success to share among that I
> am taking this week to share with you all.
> 
> As some of us may know, a key aspect of lsat prep (and other standardized
> tests but especially the LSAT) hinges on completing many, countless
> practice tests and prep tests consisting of test questions from previous
> years and administrations.
> 
> Unfortunately, a lot of us in this community rely on text to speech
> programs like jaws and zoomtext to achieve necessary outcomes and elevate
> our situation to a state I like to call, “level playing field.” Further,
> these practice test questions on myriad prep platforms and other databases
> are not accessible with text to speech programs because, for lack of a
> better way to put it, nonsense arbitrary doctrines are cited to prevent us
> from equal access to material and bringing about an equitable atmosphere
> for visually impaired peoples and others with print disabilities such as
> dyslexia and other predicaments that preclude equal access.
> 
> They hide behind the cover of pathetic covers like  intellectual property
> and other arbitrary frivolities  and grounds to deny us equal access—as if
> there is any difference as these tests are already widely available and
> public and tests of the past.
> 
> 
> We are basically dealing with a conflict of epic proportions between two
> core bodies of law—to be exact, those would be disability law and Americans
> with Disability act (1) and intellectual property and proprietary access
> laws (2). It is essential Godzilla versus King Kong type of stuff.
> Nevertheless, I want to get my colleagues views on the prospects of
> drafting legal actions that would seek to abolish such rules that prevent
> text to speech capability on the grounds of the above-intellectual property
> and other exclusionary considerations Given these circumstances and my
> extensive knowledge of the legal system, it is worth considering escalating
> this issue before courts of law to reconcile this inherent conflict—akin to
> a knife lodged against the body. We need to consider that the fight may be
> lengthy given the lag of the legal system. It might be tough. We must never
> lose sight of the fact that The benefits of efficiency from being able to
> utilize text to speech more freely in such an important area of test prep
> that puts us at equal footing with other test takers is all the reason to
> embark on this worthy journey. It will tremendously benefit ALL visually
> impaired test takers regardless of their level of impairment and other non
> visually disabled people that are print disabled and have other issues.
> This necessary, positive development will pave the way for many people that
> follow in our foot steps and will put them at an equal footing to be able
> to praise their dream like us. I encourage you all to remember The visually
> impaired plaintiff that sued on legitimate grounds like the above to remove
> logic games as will be happening after this June with the LSAT. It was
> long, time consuming but he was victorious and paved the way for a positive
> future for all of us going forward.
> 
> Taking everything into account I have stated, I am asking if this is
> something that we can embark on and an organization take legal actions on
> these grounds to advocate for this position like the national federation of
> the blind or national association of blind lawyers or even sue
> individually.
> 
> Any insight and commentary on moving forward with such necessary action
> affects positively and benefits all of us and I appreciate any feedback on
> what we are able to do in this arena going forward.
> 
> 
> This is something we have tremendous legal, backing based on the existing
> legal framework of laws to be able to pursue a meaningful way. I hope we
> can take out our swords and guns and cannons and move forward on this
> journey with a level of intensity in energy that will allow us to achieve
> this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We need to come up with a solution that involves allowing us to use text to
> speech with our softwares without allowing  search and copy and  paste
> features and the other stuff that they  allege as   supposedly undermining
> their  so called pathetic
> intellectual property.
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s move forward with this and see where we stand and where we are going
> with this.
> 
> Thanks for everyone’s attention and consideration, and I appreciate any
> feedback and further discussion and being able to discuss this further
> let’s move forward into the future with good results God willing.
> 
> Reasons are straight up, ridiculous, pathetic and completely a foul to the
> various statutes in place that protect our communities from discrimination.
> Even if they are true, like I said, we need to find the balance that
> reconcile the conflict and provide an adequate solution.
> 
> Ha ha I know my thought process and methodology must be lawyery
> 
> 
> After all, all of us are going into this business and line  of work  or
> trade to be able to
> solve complex problems, such as this one, if y’all know what I mean ha ha
> lol.
> 
> “,
> __________________________
> “
> _______________________________________________
> BlindLaw mailing list
> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sanho817%40gmail.com