[nfb-talk] stop lobbyists from scuttling accessible TV equipment

Mark Tardif markspark at roadrunner.com
Mon Jul 29 17:19:05 UTC 2013 

Very true.  When I worked for the IRS, it became obvious that many taxpayers 
who called did not necessarily have computers.  Plus there are many 
television options now, public broadcasting, documentaries, comedy and movie 
channels, news channels, lots of music, and more.




Mark Tardif
Nuclear arms will not hold you.
-----Original Message----- 
From: Ray Foret jr
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 9:50 AM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] stop lobbyists from scuttling accessible TV 
equipment

Got more news for you Josh.  Not everybody has access to the internet, so, 
you see, TV is not going away like you think it is.  It's just taking a 
different form.


Sent from my mac, the only computer with full accessibility for the blind 
built-in!
Sincerely,
The Constantly Barefooted Ray
Still a very proud and happy Mac and Iphone user!

On Jul 29, 2013, at 8:31 AM, Joshua Lester <JLester8462 at pccua.edu> wrote:

> Wow!
> I'm proud of Comcast!
> I'm sad to see TV and radio going away.
> Nowadays, we have satilite radio.
> These manufacturers are crazy!
> Why will they keep making TV's and CD players, when there's the Internet 
> and Idevices, but they won't continue making VCR's, Cassette players, etc?
> Good grief!
> Blessings, Joshua
> ________________________________________
> From: nfb-talk [nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] on behalf of Ray Foret jr 
> [rforetjr at att.net]
> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 8:24 AM
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] stop lobbyists from scuttling accessible TV 
> equipment
>
> Got news for you.  That's not quite accurate.  Comcast is now at work on 
> software which will make all of it's X! set top boxes accessible for us.
>
> http://digitaljournal.com/article/352483
>
>
> Sent from my mac, the only computer with full accessibility for the blind 
> built-in!
> Sincerely,
> The Constantly Barefooted Ray
> Still a very proud and happy Mac and Iphone user!
>
> On Jul 29, 2013, at 8:09 AM, Joshua Lester <JLester8462 at pccua.edu> wrote:
>
>> Who cares?
>> TV is a thing of the past, and will be obsilete, in the near future, 
>> because of the Internet, which is accessible!
>> Most stations are broadcasting online, and those that aren't will be 
>> soon.
>> What's the big deal?
>> What we need to focus on, is more audio description on all TV shows.
>> Blessings, Joshua
>> ________________________________________
>> From: nfb-talk [nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] on behalf of 
>> ckrugman at sbcglobal.net [ckrugman at sbcglobal.net]
>> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 8:01 AM
>> To: NFB Talk; NFB of California List
>> Subject: [nfb-talk] stop lobbyists from scuttling accessible TV equipment
>>
>> the following action may be of interest.
>> Chuck
>>
>> Mayday! Mayday! Tech Industry Lobbyists Threatening Future of Accessible 
>> Television! With One Email, Tell Them and the FCC What You Think!
>>
>> !!!"This is not a test; this is an actual emergency"!!!
>>
>>
>> For further information, contact:
>>
>> Mark Richert, Esq. Director, Public Policy, AFB
>> (202) 469-6833 MRichert at afb.net
>>
>> Dear Advocate:
>>
>> When we all celebrated the enactment of the historic Twenty-First Century 
>> Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA) almost three years ago, 
>> we were promised by our bipartisan champions on Capitol Hill, by the U.S. 
>> Congress, and the President of the United States, that one day, things 
>> would be significantly different. We were promised that the experience of 
>> people with vision loss in terms of our/their independence and full 
>> participation in American life through the full and fair use of today's 
>> most ubiquitous technologies would be forever changed.
>>
>> We were thrilled to know that there would be much more video description 
>> available on TV, and indeed today there is. We were gratified to know 
>> that the manufacturers and service providers of some of the most commonly 
>> used communications technologies, such as electronic messaging and mobile 
>> phone web browsing, would no longer be able to ignore the needs of people 
>> who are blind or visually impaired. And we were hopeful that emergency 
>> alerts would finally be meaningful for our community, and it looks like 
>> they will be.
>>
>> But we were also promised, and the new law requires, that TVs and TV-like 
>> equipment would need to be fully accessible to us. Now, in what is 
>> essentially the proverbial eleventh hour in the series of federal 
>> regulatory proceedings implementing the CVAA, the seemingly shameless 
>> consumer electronics lobby is demanding, with implied threats to go to 
>> court if they don't get their way, to strip the CVAA of its TV 
>> accessibility obligations and to violate the vision of a more accessible 
>> technology society that the CVAA represents.
>>
>> So what do our tech lobbyist "friends" want?
>>
>> Well, to answer this question, you need to know just a little bit about 
>> how the CVAA works. the CVAA says that your cable or satellite provider 
>> needs to make the equipment, the settop boxes and other such devices they 
>> give you to get their programming, accessible to you upon your request. 
>> While this is a good thing in comparison to how things have been, it is a 
>> compromise, and one that advocates reached with cable and similar 
>> providers as a condition for their willingness to allow the CVAA to 
>> become law. So, with regard to cable and satellite providers, they don't 
>> necessarily need to make all, or even most, of their equipment accessible 
>> as a matter of course; they merely have to accommodate your request for 
>> equipment you can use by providing you with something, even if it is not 
>> state-of-the-art.
>>
>> In contrast, the CVAA requires that TVs and TV-like equipment, 
>> essentially anything that receives or plays back video programming of any 
>> kind, a ton of very cool technology out there, must be accessible by 
>> default; TVs and TV-like equipment will only be allowed to be 
>> inaccessible in a given instance if, and only if, fairly strict legal 
>> exceptions apply. This means that, unlike the cable and satellite sector 
>> which may regularly traffic in inaccessible equipment so long as they can 
>> ultimately give us something we can use upon our request, makers of TVs 
>> and TV-like equipment are charged with the clear responsibility to 
>> fundamentally change their behavior in a way that would exponentially 
>> increase the commercial retail availability of the accessible and most 
>> popular video-related consumer electronics on the market.
>>
>> Ok, but what are those lobbyists up to?
>>
>> With forked-tongued craftiness, the consumer electronics lobby is, even 
>> as we speak, assuring the Federal Communications Commission
>> (FCC) of industry's commitment to the needs of people with disabilities 
>> while, without blushing, propounding some of the most contorted legal 
>> reasoning that we have seen yet. They are using the full weight of their 
>> over-indulged influence to pressure the FCC into applying the inferior, 
>> more limited cable and satellite requirements to TVs and TV-like 
>> equipment.
>>
>> If these "friends" of ours in the tech lobby get their way, rather than 
>> being able to shop for the digital TV or other video player you want and 
>> to have a robust array of choices just like everyone else, you will be 
>> forced to beg for an accessible product directly from the manufacturer. 
>> Rather than being able to enjoy the product you want to buy, you may even 
>> be expected to live with an inferior model, if you can get an accessible 
>> inferior model at all. Why are the tech lobbyists proposing this 
>> manifestly unfair arrangement? quite simply, their scheme would let their 
>> client companies off the hook for doing the right thing but leave 
>> consumers with little recourse.
>>
>> What can you do?
>>
>> Right now, the FCC is accepting comments from the public about how to 
>> implement the CVAA's TV and cable and satellite equipment requirements. 
>> AFB will help you voice your concern if you will take just a moment or 
>> two and write your thoughts in an email to us; AFB will file your 
>> comments for you. No, AFB's name will not be on your comments; your 
>> comments will be your own. We are simply offering to make the process as 
>> easy for you as possible because this issue is so uniquely critical.
>>
>> The FCC's electronic comment filing system is not the easiest system to 
>> use, and any comments filed need to include certain technical legal 
>> references. Send an email to:
>>
>> TV at afb.net
>>
>> We will be glad to add the technical pro forma details for you and to 
>> submit your comments on your behalf for the official record.
>>
>> So what exactly do you need to do?
>>
>> All you need to do to help get things back on the right track is the 
>> following:
>>
>> 1: Write an email of whatever length you wish stating in polite but 
>> pointed fashion that begging for an accessible TV or similar equipment 
>> directly from a manufacturer is categorically unacceptable to you. Tell 
>> the FCC that it was the obvious intention of Congress, and it is the 
>> expectation of people who are blind or visually impaired across America, 
>> that accessible TVs and TV-like equipment will be readily and regularly 
>> available at commercial retail stores. Remind the FCC that the so-called 
>> "upon request" compromise that we reached with the cable and satellite 
>> industries neither involved the consumer electronics lobby at the time 
>> nor applies to their client companies now. Tell the FCC that people with 
>> vision loss will not stand for the consumer electronics lobby's proposed 
>> gutting of one of the most popular and important parts of the CVAA. Tell 
>> the FCC your own story of frustrations trying to simply adjust the volume 
>> or channels on your equipment, to simply play a show or movie, to find 
>> and activate your TV's video description controls, and to otherwise make 
>> full use of your TV or TV-like equipment.
>>
>> 2: At the conclusion of the text of your email, be absolutely certain to 
>> type your first and last name, followed by your regular mailing address. 
>> When we properly format and file your comments, the FCC needs to know 
>> that you are a real person, and your comments must be accompanied by more 
>> than your email address; they must include a regular identifying mailing 
>> address. It is up to you to decide which of the addresses that you might 
>> be associated with you want to use, a home, work, or some other 
>> appropriate address. So long as your email includes both your full name 
>> and a real related address, your comments will be accepted as part of the 
>> official record. Don't worry about anything else; we will be sure to fill 
>> out the rest of the required information, such as the docket number for 
>> this proceeding and similar formalities.
>>
>> 3: Between now and Monday, August 5, send your email to:
>>
>> TV at afb.net
>>
>> and simply begin the text of your email with the greeting, "To whom it 
>> may concern." A simple "Sincerely" or "Respectfully" at the conclusion of 
>> your message and before your full name and address will be fine.
>>
>> Once we receive your email, we will properly format it and submit it to 
>> the FCC. The deadline for all comments is Wednesday, August
>> 7. However, given that we hope and expect that we will receive a 
>> considerable number of comments, please send us your email comments no 
>> later than Monday, August 5 or as soon as you possibly can.
>>
>> Thank you in advance for your advocacy, keep hope alive, and please share 
>> this call to action widely.
>>
>> This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from 
>> http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nfb-talk:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/jlester8462%40pccua.edu
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nfb-talk:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/rforetjr%40att.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/jlester8462%40pccuaedu.onmicrosoft.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/rforetjr%40att.net


_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
nfb-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/markspark%40roadrunner.com


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3209/6528 - Release Date: 07/28/13

More information about the nFB-Talk mailing list