[Electronics-talk] Issues with Cox remote top boxes

Wed Jan 25 01:13:18 UTC 2012

You are vary welcome. Glad to help.

In a message dated 1/24/2012 6:52:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
dewey.bradley at kc.rr.com writes:

Thanks!
I couldn't remember what it was called.

-----  Original Message ----- 
From: <GeorTsoukala at aol.com>
To:  <electronics-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 5:44  PM
Subject: Re: [Electronics-talk] Issues with Cox remote top  boxes

It is the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video  Accessibility Act.
I have copied an article  below.
George

AccessWorld ®
Technology and  People Who Are  Blind or Visually Impaired

January  2012 Issue  Volume 13  Number  1

>From AFB's  Policy  Center
The Twenty-First Century Communications and Video  Accessibility Act:
Highlights of a New Landmark Communications Law
Mark  Richert

If you would have told me a decade ago that one day there would  be a law
requiring virtually all text communication, mobile phone Web  browsers, TVs,
and  broadcast emergency alerts to be fully accessible  to people who are
blind or  visually impaired, I would likely have  told you to keep 
dreaming. 
But
if you  also told me that this same  legislation would be stronger than any
communications law for people with  disabilities previously enacted, that it
would result in more than 60 hours  a week of described video programming,
and,  amazingly, that it would  permanently make up to $10 million per year
available  to put  expensive communications equipment in the hands of people
who are   deaf-blind, I might have told you that you have a rich, albeit  
nerdy,
fantasy  life.

As incredible as it sounds, such  legislation is now the law of the land,
thanks to the passage of the  Twenty-First Century Communications and Video
Accessibility Act, or CVAA.  While readers of AccessWorld are no doubt some 
of
the more savvy and  connected folks who follow developments in technology
policy,  this  brief rundown of what the CVAA does was written to provide a
better   understanding of the changes people who are blind or visually  
impaired
can and  should expect from the communications, consumer  electronics, and
video  programming  industries.

Communications
Long before the CVAA became law,  telecommunications  equipment
manufacturers and service providers had  some limited responsibilities  for 
ensuring that
people with  disabilities could independently make phone calls  and use  
both
traditional and mobile phone technologies. Under these   long-standing
rules, the equipment and services provided need only be  accessible  when 
doing so
doesn't require a company to invest much  money or effort to make  it
happen. What's more, with some  exceptions-such as caller ID and address 
book
functions-the old rules were  limited to phone call accessibility. The many
common functions people use  their phones for today, such as text messaging,
email, and browsing the  Internet, were not covered. That's where the CVAA 
comes
in. Now,  companies that make communications equipment or offer  related
services  must make advanced functions such as electronic  messaging 
accessible
unless it's  simply not possible to do so. In  effect, the CVAA raises the
bar considerably in  terms of what  companies are expected to do for
communications accessibility, and   goes a long way to clarify 
accessibility 
standards
and  responsibilities.

Any time a member of Congress talks about regulating  something related to
the Internet, people get skittish. So when access  advocates made it clear
that  full accessibility, including Internet  accessibility, was required if
people  with vision impairment were to  have full use of the devices and
services they  pay for, both industry  and Congress got a bit nervous.
Nevertheless, advocates  insisted that  any law lauding itself as a 
twenty-first century
accessibility  law  had to deal with the Internet. As a result, the CVAA 
does
cover  Internet access,  but in a bit of a limited way. The CVAA states  
that
whenever electronic  messaging is offered-whether it's on a  mobile phone, a
desk phone, a desktop  computer, or some other  device-it must be accessible
to people with  disabilities. In the case  of Internet browsing, however,
the law is a bit  narrower. Only the  browsers on mobile phones need to be
accessible, and the  CVAA, rather  unusually and disappointingly, limits 
this
accessibility  requirement  to those who are blind or visually impaired. 
Those
with other   disabilities are not covered.

Though the electronic messaging and  Internet browser access requirements
are already considered to be in  effect, noncompliance complaints will not 
be
heard by the Federal  Communications Commission (FCC) until October 2013.
Why  this strange  timeline? The law was signed by President Obama on 
October
8, 2010,   and the FCC was required to issue regulations implementing the 
new
law one  year  from that date. As part of the process for developing  those
rules, the FCC heard  from industry that at least a two-year  transition 
period
would be required to  adequately prepare for the  new mandates. The
accessibility community raised  strong objections to  the two-year delay, 
so 
the FCC
compromised by requiring  that the  new access obligations begin 
immediately,
but that complaints about   noncompliance won't be entertained until the
two-year window has passed.  So,  starting in October of 2013, a complaint 
can
be filed with  the FCC concerning  equipment or service inaccessibility
experienced  at any time, including  retroactive complaints dating back to  
the
start of the law's implementation. In  other words, if you buy  a mobile 
phone in
2012 that doesn't offer you accessible  text  messaging or e-mail
functionality, you can complain to the FCC about  it-in  October of 2013. 
In 
any event,
once the complaint is filed,  the FCC will work  with you to resolve the
complaint with the company.  If the complaint is not  resolved, the FCC will
make a final  determination-which could involve anything  from a finding 
that
your  complaint is without merit or that the company violated   the
accessibility law-within six months. If a company is found to have  
violated 
the CVAA,
it may be liable for financial penalties (payable to  the United  States),
and/or maybe required to a change in behavior on  the company's part to 
ensure
accessibility going forward. The FCC is  also empowered to make the  
consumer
whole, meaning that complaint  resolution should include putting an
accessible phone in the hand of the  consumer at no additional cost, even 
if 
the
accessible phone is a   higher priced, more feature-rich device.

Video Programming
As  exciting as the CVAA communications requirements  are in terms of  their
potential to revolutionize our personal and workplace  inclusion  and
competitiveness, the CVAA video programming provisions are sure  to  be 
among 
the
new law's most popular features. First and  foremost is the CVAA  
unambiguous
requirement that greatly increases  the availability of video  description 
of
prime-time and children's  programming. While PBS has offered  described
programming for years  and a couple national broadcast networks have 
described a
few programs  here and there, the commercial broadcasting, cable, and
motion picture  industries have fought tooth and nail to prevent video
description from  becoming a right of the blind and visually impaired  
television
audience. The CVAA unambiguously establishes that the four  national 
broadcast
networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox, as well as the  top-ranked channels' USA, 
the
Disney Channel, TNT, Nickelodeon, and  TBS, must describe at least 50 hours
of  their prime-time and/or  children's programming during each calendar
quarter.  That's an  average of at least four hours per week.

These new video description  regulations make a bit of a distinction between
the obligation of the  CVAA-covered networks to provide description and the
obligations of your  local station or rural cable company to pass that
description on to you.  There are some protections in the CVAA for small 
cable
providers and  for local stations that would experience a serious
technological   and/or financial burden in order to provide the service. 
That  
said,
since  passing through description shouldn't be a big  technical or 
financial
deal for  almost every station and cable  provider in America, we should 
assume
that  description will be  very widely available.

So, beginning next July, what do you do if your  favorite show isn't being
described or you can't seem to get your hands on  a description? You of
course  can contact your local station or cable  provider and ask them how 
to
receive  their pass-through of the  described programming. You can also 
contact
the  national networks  to request that a given program be described. If 
your
local  station  or cable provider tells you that they do not pass 
description
through  or  that they don't know how to make it happen for you, you can
lodge  a complaint  with the FCC. While the station or cable provider  might
reply that they don't  have to guarantee description and/or that  passing
description through would  constitute prohibitive cost, the  FCC needs to 
determine
whether either of those  claims is true. As  a side note: the disability
community asked the FCC to set  parameters  for stations and cable 
providers 
who
might claim that getting   technically up to speed to pass description
through would require more than  a  modest cost, and the FCC declined.

A related issue is how to  tune into a program if our TV and/or cable box or
satellite equipment is  itself inaccessible. The CVAA states that digital
TVs and  other  devices that receive and play broadcast and cable 
programming
must  have  controls that allow people with vision loss to use  all
programming-relevant  menus, to scan channels, to easily turn on  
description 
for
programs offering it,  and to manipulate any and  all features related to 
these
functions. Gone will be  the days  when simply using the volume control
requires sighted assistance.

As  always, there are a few provisos. While equipment like digital TVs  will
have to provide accessible controls and menus out of the box, cable  and
satellite providers need only make their equipment accessible upon the  
request
of a customer. Why the difference? Well, some tech experts have  pointed
out that  the set-top box's days are numbered in terms of  being the primary
way for cable  and satellite companies to securely  deliver their 
programming,
so including them  in the law would be  legislating a dying technology.
Regardless, whether access  is built  into the device or provided upon 
request,
it's clearly required by  the  CVAA. Implementation of this requirement is
still being defined,  but will  certainly take place over multiple years. 
AFB 
is
playing  a leadership role in  this process, joining industry and advocates
to  set the direction the FCC will  follow in issuing the next major set  of
regulations to make all this possible.  It's a slow process, but in  the 
end 
it
will result in substantial improvements  to  accessibility.

Other Key Benefits of the CVAA
As mentioned earlier,  the CVAA will break  down enormous barriers for those
of us who are  deaf-blind by establishing, for  the first time, a clear  and
substantial source of funding for the often  incredibly expensive  equipment
needed to communicate interpersonally and via the  telephone  or the
Internet. This $10-million program, administered by the FCC   through an 
array of
agreements with organizations and consortia from  around the  country, will
provide both equipment and training in the  use of equipment.  Methods for
procuring equipment and receiving  training will depend on location.  As of 
this
writing, the FCC is  still setting up various agreements with regional
organizations and  agencies, but the bottom line is that the CVAA will fill 
a 
huge
gap by  creating a reliable resource pipeline.

The CVAA also fills a gap in the  way emergency information is broadcast to
those of us who can't see  on-screen text. The status quo simply alerts the
viewer with vision loss  about emergency information through a simple tone.
The  CVAA says that  the FCC will establish more meaningful ways for viewers
with  vision  loss to access emergency information, particularly through
audible   messages containing the text of the displayed emergency alert. 
AFB  
is
leading  advocacy efforts as the FCC hammers out the specifics  of this
element of the  law.

Future Issues
Of course no  single law can anticipate every contingency  or address  every
problem-particularly a law concerned with communications   accessibility-but
the CVAA does tackle a wide array of barriers to  access.  Devices that
aren't yet covered by the CVAA but that will  clearly need to be  addressed 
in the
future  include:

Hand-held gaming devices that also allow users to text each  other.
TVs  that connect to the Internet and allow phone calls.
The  increasing number of  devices that can connect to the Internet but  are
not within the communications  and entertainment realm, such as  the kitchen
appliance or the thermostat that  can be manipulated from  the cloud.
With respect to multi-function devices,  like the gaming  device that also
offers text messaging, the CVAA regulations  state  that the FCC will look
both to the way a device is designed and how  the  device is marketed to
determine what the primary purpose of a  given device  really is. If that 
primary
purpose is not a  communications function covered by  the CVAA, the device 
need
not  be accessible. So, does the gaming device that  offers text  messaging
need to be accessible? If the device is designed to allow   the user to send
and receive text messages between individuals and is at  all  marketed for 
its
ability to do so, it should be covered by  the CVAA. That said,  the CVAA
allows industry to petition the FCC for  a waiver of coverage for
mixed-function devices that they argue have a  primary purpose other than 
CVAA-covered
communication. We'll have to  watch for any such petitions and  respond
accordingly. We also need to  do a much better job in our community with 
complaint
generation and  follow-through. While it's true that the FCC doesn't  have a
very good  track record of aggressive enforcement of communications
accessibility  laws, it's equally true that the disability community has  
generated
precious few complaints to hold industry accountable for the  uniformly  bad
job it has done to make traditional and mobile phones  accessible. If the
vast array of new expectations created by the CVAA are  going to have any
meaning, individual consumers must refuse to put up with  unusable 
technology 
and
be willing to make their voices heard through  the complaint process.
Remember  that if you think that a device  you're using is noncompliant, and
you're willing  to take action, AFB  stands ready to help as you navigate 
your way
through the   complaint process.

Comment on This Article

In a message dated 1/24/2012 6:15:16  P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
dewey.bradley at kc.rr.com writes:

Do  you  know what bill it is, I couldn't find it, I wasn't aware that  it
had
passed

----- Original Message ----- 
From:   <GeorTsoukala at aol.com>
To:   <electronics-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012  5:08  PM
Subject: Re: [Electronics-talk] Issues with Cox remote  top  boxes

>I believe it was part of the law that passed  in  2012.
>
>
>
> In a message dated 1/24/2012  3:18:12  P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>  dewey.bradley at kc.rr.com  writes:
>
> Isn't  there a bill  in congress to require  companies to make that stuff
>  accessible?
>
> -----  Original Message ----- 
> From:  "Julie  Phillipson"  <jbrew48 at verizon.net>
> To: "Tony  Sohl"   <tonysohl at cox.net>; "Discussion of  accessible
electronics
>  and  appliances"  <electronics-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent:  Tuesday, January  24,  2012 2:04 PM
> Subject: Re:  [Electronics-talk] Issues  with Cox remote top   boxes
>
>
>>a few years  ago there was some articles I  think in the  monitor but  it
may
>>have been from access world  or could have  been  both.  It compared a few
>>models as to  which  were the easier ones  to use.
>>
>>
>>   Julie Phillipson
>> ----- Original  Message -----  
>>  From: "Tony Sohl" <tonysohl at cox.net>
>>  To:   <Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday,  January 24,  2012  1:40 PM
>> Subject: [Electronics-talk]  Issues with Cox  remote top   boxes
>>
>>
>>> Hi I was  wondering are  there any accessible  cable boxes on the market
>   or
>>> any way I can access the menus such  as turning on  the  second audio
>>> program for DVS? If anyone has   some  suggestions, then let me know.
>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>   Electronics-talk  mailing list
>>>   Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>    http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>   To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info   
for
>>>  Electronics-talk:
>>>
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org/jbrew48%40veri
zon.net
>>
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>   Electronics-talk  mailing list
>>   Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
>>    http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
>>   To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info   
for
>>   Electronics-talk:
>>
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org/dewey.bradley%
40kc.rr.com
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
>  Electronics-talk   mailing  list
>  Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
>   http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
>   To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info   for
> Electronics-talk:
>   http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electroni
cs-talk_nfbnet.org/geortsoukala%4
>   0aol.com
>
>   _______________________________________________
> Electronics-talk   mailing list
> Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
>   http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
>  To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info  for
>   Electronics-talk:
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org/dewey.bradley%
40kc.rr.com

_______________________________________________
Electronics-talk   mailing   list
Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
To   unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info  for
Electronics-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org/geortsoukala%4
0aol.com

_______________________________________________
Electronics-talk  mailing  list
Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for  
Electronics-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org/dewey.bradley%
40kc.rr.com  

_______________________________________________
Electronics-talk  mailing  list
Electronics-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org
To  unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for  
Electronics-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/electronics-talk_nfbnet.org/geortsoukala%4
0aol.com