[Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THEBLIND BYFAILINGTOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS

Chris Nusbaum dotkid.nusbaum at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 01:36:22 UTC 2012


I agree.  Although it's annoying to have to pay higher fairs just 
because you can't use the Web site (and I believe it is important 
that Southwest make their site accessible,) this isn't 
discriminatory, as people who don't have access to the Internet 
for whatever reason, regardless of their vision or lack thereof, 
will have to pay these fees as well.

 I recall a discussion last year about Southwest and 
accessibility in which Peter Donahue expressed some very strong 
feelings objecting to the practices of Southwest.  He wrote a 
message to us after he had contacted Southwest's customer service 
department and had expressed his feelings to them.  I wonder if 
he got anywhere with them.

Chris

"The real problem of blindness is not the loss of eyesight.  The 
real problem is the misunderstanding and lack of education that 
exists.  If a blind person has the proper training and 
opportunity, blindness can be reduced to a mere physical 
nuisance."
-- Kenneth Jernigan

 ----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Freeman" <k7uij at panix.com
To: <gwunder at earthlink.net>, "'Blind Talk Mailing List'" 
<blindtlk at nfbnet.org
Date sent: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 21:15:54 -0800
Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THEBLIND	
BYFAILINGTOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS

Gary:

You initially left out the alternative of using a reader.  I 
still consider
that a viable alternative in many instances though, as you point 
out, not
all.  And I think it can be equally argued that such things as 
higher fares
are just part of the cost of doing business as a blind person; no 
one ever
said blindness wasn't a nuisance.  A similar thing happens when 
one uses a
guide dog and must rent an apartment.  While one can argue that 
charging a
pet deposit for a guide dog is and should be illegal, I know one 
former dog
guide owner who strongly felt that he should pay the pet deposit 
and that
this was just part of the cost of doing business as a blind 
person who chose
to use a guide dog.

In other words, when is something just one of the nuisances of 
blindness and
when is it truly discriminatory? In my own mind, while I might 
grumble, I
believe the higher fares from using telephone personnel to make 
reservations
might well just be a cost of doing business as a blind person.  
However,
requiring us to make arrangements 24 hours in advance and 
segregating our
seating because we don't get the "letter" seats truly is 
discriminatory
because it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual burden 
Southwest
incurs by carrying a blind person which, in reality, is no 
different than
that incurred carrying a sighted person.

You may see this as nit-picking.  But of such nits are both a 
philosophy of
blindness and legal precedent made.

Also, let me hasten to add that this is a different issue from 
inaccessible
home appliances or office equipment as it is also different from 
the issue
of those ever-changing keycard or credit card interfaces that was 
recently
written of on the R&D Committee list.  Those are true threats!

Your point is well-taken that we try to negotiate and work out 
something
reasonable long before we ever sue.  Perhaps we don't publicize 
this enough.
But often parties to the negotiations don't want publicity until 
an
agreement is reached if that's possible.

Perhaps the Monitor should do a case study of an issue wherein 
negotiations
were tried and failed leading to suit or, perhaps, in which 
negotiations
were successful, obviating the need for a lawsuit.  And no; I'm 
not
volunteering to write such an article.  (huge grin)

Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: blindtlk-bounces at nfbnet.org 
[mailto:blindtlk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Gary Wunder
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 6:52 PM
To: 'Blind Talk Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND
BYFAILINGTOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS

One problem, of course, is that these devices are offered as an 
alternative
to hiring personnel to talk with us and help us make choices.  If 
there is no
way for us to do a thing, there is no discrimination, but if a 
device can be
made accessible but simply is not, then we allow our own 
exclusion by not
trying to press for equal access.

I think there is one other point here.  I've never seen a 
Federation action
commenced in court where first a negotiated settlement wasn't 
tried and
tried and tried.  It is often accepted that our society is 
lawsuit happy, but
my experience, at least as far as we are concerned, is that the 
suit is the
last chance we have to make a difference.  We didn't start by 
suing AOL or
Target or the National Council of Bar Examiners.  There were 
clear efforts to
get the attention of their brass and often our work at making 
contact was
met with the determined resolution to keep us away from anyone 
who could
make a decision.  Even in the case of the car companies and cars 
too quiet to
hear, we were not initially welcomed by the companies with open 
arms.  They
used their PR people to keep us away from their technicians, 
their managers,
and their sound experts.  Had we not worked on a law, we would 
not have had
the chance to build the relationships that lead to it.  Equally 
true is that
if we were simply sue happy, we'd have filed suit and still be 
litigating,
rather than working on implementing regulations to make our 
travel safer.

I hate war, but I recognize that a country that openly commits it 
will never
go to war has told his would-be aggressors they will find easy 
victory.

One last thought.  What I can usually accept as a reasonable 
accommodation by
relying on another person soon becomes unworkable.  Airlines are 
a good
example.  Electronic ticket purchasing was at first a 
convenience.  Now listen
on the phone and learn that there are special fares available 
only for those
who check-in online.  Look at the studies and find how 
infrequently blind
travelers, even when they say they are blind and cannot use the 
online
systems, are offered fares higher than those available online.  
Look at the
seating policy on Southwest where we are "invited" to check-in 24 
hours
ahead of our flight, but if you don't do that, you are not in the
preferential boarding group they designate with letters.  At this 
point my
alternative technique isn't much of an alternative so I start 
pressing for
an accessible website.  The service that starts only as 
entertainment soon
becomes part of a homework assignment for school and a way to 
distribute
educational materials on the job.  The distinction between what 
is
entertainment and what is absolutely critical is harder and 
harder to make
as televisions become computers and computers become any kind of 
device one
can imagine.  Who would have thought that we'd arrive at a time 
when someone
would select a telephone based on the radio and television 
content it would
make available.

At our last Missouri board meeting, I asked how many people 
routinely hire
readers.  Of the thirty people there, three said they did.  I 
asked about
volunteers and got nothing in response.  So, whether for good or 
ill, many of
us do not have or do not avail ourselves of sighted assistance.  
This
wouldn't work for me with the print that passes through my 
office, but
apparently it works for others and the answer has to be 
accessible hardware
and software to read mail, pay bills, and fill out the forms that 
are
required to get along in the world.

Warmly,

Gary



-----Original Message-----
From: blindtlk-bounces at nfbnet.org 
[mailto:blindtlk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Bryan Schulz
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 8:01 PM
To: Blind Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND
BYFAILINGTOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS

hi,

this is a main problem i see with blind people; they are too
proud/egotistical to admit they need help.
i guarantee you like at a McDonald's location, one of the workers 
there
wouldn't mind saying what movies they have on hand maybe unless 
it was high
noon and all lines were 4-5 customers deep.
it could actually go smoother as they probably know how to 
quickly work the
machine and they feel glad to help.
so you say "yes, that one sounds good, thanks" then swipe your 
card.
Bryan Schulz


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Ray Foret Jr
  To: Blind Talk Mailing List
  Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 7:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND 
BY
FAILINGTOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS


  Uh, in which case, how would you propose to enter the choices 
you want?  I
still maintain the action is correct; and, I want to make my own  
choices.
Why should you not?


  Sincerely,
  The Constantly Barefooted Ray!!!

  Now a very proud and happy Mac user!!!

  Skype name:
  barefootedray

  Facebook:
  facebook.com/ray.foretjr.1



  On Jan 15, 2012, at 7:41 PM, Bryan Schulz wrote:

 hi,

 this is not like using an atm.
 all you have to do is swipe your card and don't have to punch in 
your
pin.
 other than being able to know what the choices are, the 
accessibility
challenge is the same as the airport terminal case which was 
lost.
 if there is one that should be accessible, i would say the 
airport
terminal is more important.

 Bryan Schulz

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Marion Gwizdala
  To: Blind Talk Mailing List
  Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 6:58 PM
  Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND 
BY
FAILING TOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS


  Bryan,
      There is not an architect in the United States who would 
design a
  building with steps and would not consider designing an 
alternative
method
  of accessing the building.  Similarly, no architect would 
design this
  building with doorways too narrow to accommodate a wheelchair.  
the
reason
  these accessible design features are so globally implemented 
into
buildings
  is due to the advocacy of those who use wheelchairs.  I suppose 
one
could
  argue that someone else could go into the building to conduct 
the
business
  for the wheelchair user, just as you argue that someone else 
can
complete
  the transaction at Red Box for the blind.  The law defines
discrimination, in
  part, as an unequal benefit and this is certainly unequal.
      I believe it is reasonable for the blind to expect that 
digital
  architecture is accessible to us.  law suits are one of the 
ways these
things
  are accomplished.  In our system of justice known as  case law, 
the
courts
  are responsible for interpreting just what a particular law 
actually
means
  and defining its practical implementation.  It is due time that 
those
  responsible for designing digital architecture be held 
responsible for
the
  simple features of audible output.  Until companies understand 
that
blind
  people are consumers, we will continue to be unequal.

  Fraternally yours,
  Marion Gwizdala





  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Bryan Schulz" <b.schulz at sbcglobal.net
  To: "Blind Talk Mailing List" <blindtlk at nfbnet.org
  Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 7:13 PM
  Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND 
BY
FAILING
  TOPROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS


  hi,

  so if someone had to take the guy to the location anyway, why 
is he so
  miffed about the machine?
  why not sue the film company for leaving out descriptions as 
well?
  people today are very sue happy.

  Bryan Schulz

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: David Andrews
    To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
    Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 11:54 AM
    Subject: [Blindtlk] REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND BY 
FAILING
TO
  PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE KIOSKS




 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



 January 12, 2012



 CONTACTS: Bryan Bashin, CEO, Lighthouse for the
 Blind (415) 694-7346 Lisamaria Martinez,
 plaintiff (510) 289-2577 Michael Nunez of
 Disability Rights Advocates (510) 665-8644 Jay
 Koslofsky of Law Offices of Jay Koslofsky (510) 280-5627




 REDBOX DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE BLIND BY
 FAILING TO PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE SELF-SERVICE
 KIOSKS Oakland, CA - January 12, 20012 - Recent
 technological advances are sweeping the nattion,
 changing the way people buy products and
 services.  Self-service kiosks with automated,
 touch-screen interfaces now allow people to
 bank, shop, and conduct a wide range of
 transactions independently, without the
 assistance of a clerk.  This technology is fast
 becoming an integral part of our every day
 lives.  Although these technologies can make our
 lives easier, Redbox, a video rental giant, has
 chosen to use self-service kiosks with
 touch-screen controls that exclude the blind
 from using its services.  Blind Californians
 cannot use touch-screen kiosks that offer only
 visually-based controls.  A class action lawsuit
 filed today in the United States District Court
 for the Northern District of California
 challenges Redboxâ?Ts inaccessible kiosks.  The
 lawsuit is the first of its kind in the country.
 The suit is brought by the Lighthouse for the
 Blind and Visually Impaired, as well as five
 blind individuals, on behalf of blind and
 visually impaired people throughout
 California.  Plaintiffs are represented by
 Disability Rights Advocates (â?oDRAâ?·), a
 non-profit disability rights legal center
 headquartered in Berkeley, California that
 specializes in high-impact cases on behalf of
 people with disabilities.  Plaintiffs are also
 represented by the Law Offices of Jay Koslofsky;
 Mr.  Koslofsky is an experienced civil rights
 attorney.  Redbox has a major share of the video
 rental market.  Redbox DVD rentals account for
 approximately 34% of the DVD rental market
 nationwide.  According to Redbox, almost 60
 million videos are rented from its kiosks
 nationally each month.  Redbox kiosks can be
 found at thousands of businesses throughout
 California including Save Mart, which is a
 business that is also named as a defendant in
 the lawsuit.  For generations, blind and visually
 impaired people have watched and enjoyed movies
 as an ordinary part of daily life.  Blind people
 with some remaining vision may watch films on
 their own or with sighted friends and family who
 can describe the details and actions of a film.
 In addition, many blind people enjoy watching
 dialogue driven films.  Plaintiff Lisamaria
 Martinez is a legally blind resident of Union
 City, California.  â?·I love watching movies with
 my husband and son and would like to
 independently rent movies for my family at
 Redboxes,â?· said Lisamaria Martinez.  Plaintiff
 Joshua Saunders is a legally blind resident of
 El Cerrito, California who enjoys watching
 movies with friends and family.  â?oIâ?Tm not
 asking for the world here but simply for the
 ability to rent DVDs from Redboxes just like
 everyone else can,â?· said Joshua Saunders.
 Redboxâ?Ts inaccessible touch-screen kiosks shut
 out a large and growing community of blind
 Californians.  It is estimated that 100,000
 Californians are legally blind and as the
 population continues to age, the number of
 adults with vision loss will increase.  The
 technology exists to make self-service kiosks
 accessible to the blind.  Accessible ATMs and
 iPhones make use of tactile controls and/or
 screen reading software that enables blind
 people to use these devices.  â?oA lack of
 accessibility in newly emerging forms of
 commerce is a symptom of the overall growing
 technological divide that blind people
 experience when companies fail to build in
 accessible features at the onset,â?· said Bryan
 Bashin, Executive Director/CEO of the Lighthouse
 for the Blind and Visually Impaired.
 â?oTechnology is a double edged sword.  It has
 the power to enable millions, but it can disable
 many Americans far more than it enables them if
 accessibility is not built into technology at
 the beginning,â?· said Jay Koslofsky,
 Plaintiffsâ?T attorney of the Law Offices of Jay
 Koslofsky.  â?oRedbox is shutting out thousands
 of Californians from its services because it
 refuses to make its technology accessible to
 blind consumers,â?· said Michael Nunez,
 Plaintiffsâ?T attorney of Disability Rights
 Advocates.  About Lighthouse for the Blind and
 Visually Impaired The Lighthouse for the Blind
 and Visually Impaired, a non-profit corporation,
 is one of Californiaâ?Ts oldest organizations
 serving the blind and visually impaired
 community.  The Lighthouse is dedicated to
 aiding blind and visually impaired individuals
 in leading productive, enriching, and
 independent lives.  About Disability Rights
 Advocates (DRA) Disability Rights Advocates is a
 non-profit legal center which, for nearly twenty
 years, has specialized in high-impact class
 action litigation on behalf of people with all
 types of disabilities.  DRA litigates nationally
 and has offices in New York City and Berkeley,
 California.  About Law Offices of Jay Koslofsky
 Jay Koslofsky is an attorney in private practice
 with more than 30 years of experience.  He
 specializes in civil rights cases and class action litigation.  
###


    _______________________________________________
    blindtlk mailing list
    blindtlk at nfbnet.org
    http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
    To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
info for

  blindtlk:

http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40
sbcglobal.n
et
  _______________________________________________
  blindtlk mailing list
  blindtlk at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
info for
  blindtlk:

http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/blind411%40
verizon.net




  _______________________________________________
  blindtlk mailing list
  blindtlk at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
info for
blindtlk:

http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40
sbcglobal.n
et
 _______________________________________________
 blindtlk mailing list
 blindtlk at nfbnet.org
 http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
 To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
info for
blindtlk:
 
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/rforetjr%40
att.net

  _______________________________________________
  blindtlk mailing list
  blindtlk at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
info for
blindtlk:

http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40
sbcglobal.n
et
_______________________________________________
blindtlk mailing list
blindtlk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
for
blindtlk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40e
arthlink.ne
t


_______________________________________________
blindtlk mailing list
blindtlk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
for
blindtlk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40pan
ix.com


_______________________________________________
blindtlk mailing list
blindtlk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
for blindtlk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/dotkid.nusb
aum%40gmail.com





More information about the BlindTlk mailing list