[blindlaw] [nfbcs] Amazon and Sony Are Requesting That The Accessibility Requirement Be Waived for E-Book Readers
Michael Nowicki
mnowicki4 at icloud.com
Sat Aug 10 02:59:42 UTC 2013
Because the arguments supporting the petition are so absurd.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 9, 2013, at 7:49 PM, Daniel McBride <dlmlaw at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Mike:
>
> Why would you be surprised should the FCC believe Amazon and Sony?
>
> Pfizer, Roche and other pharmaceutical giants wield unwarranted influence
> over the FDA. Monsanto, Conagra and other agricultural giants wield
> unwarranted influence over the USDA. So, why would it surprise you that
> media giants, such as Amazon and Sony, wield unwarranted influence over the
> FCC?
>
> Dan McBride
> Fort Worth, Texas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Michael
> Nowicki
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 4:39 PM
> To: 'Blind Law Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] [nfbcs] Amazon and Sony Are Requesting That The
> Accessibility Requirement Be Waived for E-Book Readers
>
> Hi list members,
>
> As ridiculous as this petition sounds, should we, the blind, be concerned
> about it? I would be extremely surprised if the FCC believed Amazon, Kobo,
> and Sony, but as we all know, anything is possible. Therefore, does the NFB
> have a plan of action?
>
> Michal
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Aaron
> Cannon
> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2013 2:40 PM
> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> Cc: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] [nfbcs] Amazon and Sony Are Requesting That The
> Accessibility Requirement Be Waived for E-Book Readers
>
> I reviewed their complete submission, and here are what I believe to be
> their main points, followed by my responses below to each.
>
> 1. E-readers are different than tablets.
> 2. E-readers are marketed and used for reading, and are not designed for
> accessibility, even on a secondary basis.
> 3. Adding accessibility features would fundamentally alter the devices.
> 4. Adding such features would not help the blind or visually impaired, as
> they have alternatives.
>
> 1. I'll grant this point, though the differences may not be so great as they
> would like the FCC to believe.
>
> 2. This is irrelevant. Computers, tablets, mobile phones, Apple TVs, and
> almost all other electronic devices that are accessible are not designed for
> accessibility, either primarily or secondarily. However, that doesn't keep
> them from being accessible in many cases.
>
> 3. I can find not one bit of evidence to support this assertion in their
> submission. The assertion is made, but isn't backed up in their submission.
> Simply stating that a piece of hardware is designed for one purpose does not
> mean that it can't be used for another purpose.
> However, not only have they not shown that they would need to modify the
> hardware, but that doing so would fundamentally alter the devices.
>
> 4. I believe that this argument is both wrong, and in this non-lawyers
> opinion, contrary to how accessibility laws seem to work in general.
>
> It's wrong because users have access to features on e-reader devices which
> are not available via the alternatives. As an example, users who own a
> Kindle can borrow books to read for free, if they have an Amazon Prime
> subscription. However, I have an Amazon Prime subscription, and I cannot
> borrow books under this program, because the Kindle is not accessible, and
> the program is not available to people who don't use a Kindle. In short, I
> can not borrow ebooks from Amazon because their e-reader is not accessible.
> This, to me, completely undermines their argument that perfectly good
> alternatives exist.
>
> It would also appear to be a faulty argument, because the law they are
> contesting makes no provision for exceptions if other alternatives are
> available. In fact, I can't think of any federal law regarding
> accessibility where this is the case. You can't, for example, as a
> restaurant owner, discriminate against guide dog users based on the argument
> that there is another, much nicer restaurant across the street that doesn't
> discriminate.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> Aaron Cannon
>
> On 8/7/13, David Andrews <dandrews at visi.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> From: Howell, Scott (HQ-LE050)
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 5:00 AM
>>> To: Moore, Craig E. (MSFC-EV43)
>>> Subject: Fwd: Amazon and Sony Are Requesting That The Accessibility
>>> Requirement Be Waived for E-Book Readers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Craig,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sharing as information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Amazon and Sony Are Requesting That The Accessibility Requirement Be
>>> Waived for E-Book Readers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Details
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The ) Twenty-First Century Communications and Video ) Accessibility
>>> Act of 2010 requires companies who make electronic devices to make
>>> them accessible to people with disabilities. At this time, none of the
>>> Ebook readers that are on the market meet this requirement. Since many
>>> companies feel that this requirement should not apply to Ebook
>>> readers, Amazon, Kobo, and Sony have submitted a petition to the FCC
>>> asking for a waiver. According to the petition, this is the definition
>>> of an Ebook reader: "E-readers, sometimes called e-book readers, are
>>> mobile electronic devices that are designed, marketed and used
>>> primarily for the purpose of reading digital documents, including
>>> e-books and periodicals." Since Ebook readers are primarily designed
>>> for print reading, the companies are arguing that the disabled
>>> community would not significantly benefit from these devices becoming
>>> accessible. They also argue that because the devices are so simple,
>>> making the changes to the devices to make them accessible, would cause
>>> them to be heavier, have poorer battery life, and raise the cost of
>>> the devices.
>>> Finally, these companies argue that since their apps are accessible on
>>> other devices such as the iPad and other full featured tablets, that
>>> they are already providing access to their content.
>>> We've posted the complete filing from the FCC's website below. Here is
>>> a <http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022314526>link to the
>>> original .PDF
>>>
>>> Before the
>>> FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
>>> Washington, D.C. 20554
>>> In the Matter of )
>>> )
>>> Implementation of Sections 716 and 717 of the ) CG Docket No. 10-213
>>> Communications Act of 1934, as Enacted by the ) Twenty-First Century
>>> Communications and Video ) Accessibility Act of 2010 )
>>> )
>>> )
>>> Petition for Waiver of Sections 716 and 717 ) of the Communications
>>> Act and Part 14 of the ) Commission’s Rules Requiring Access to )
>>> Advanced Communications Services (ACS) and ) Equipment by People with
>>> Disabilities )
>>> To: Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau COALITION OF
>>> E-READER MANUFACTURERS PETITION FOR WAIVER Gerard J. Waldron Daniel H.
>>> Kahn COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
>>> 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
>>> Washington, D.C. 20004-2401
>>> (202) 662-6000
>>> Counsel for the Coalition of E-Reader
>>> Manufacturers
>>> May 16, 2013
>>> TABLE OF CONTENTS
>>> I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
>>> ..........................................................................
> .....
>>> 1
>>> II. E-READERS ARE A DISTINCT CLASS OF EQUIPMENT
>>> ...........................................
>>> 2
>>> III. E-READERS ARE USED PRIMARILY FOR READING
>>> ...............................................
>>> 3
>>> A. E-Readers Are Designed and Marketed for Reading
>>> ..............................................
>>> 4
>>> B. E-Readers Are Not Designed or Marketed for ACS
>>> ...............................................
>>> 6
>>> IV. THE REQUESTED WAIVER WILL ADVANCE THE PUBLIC INTEREST ................
>>> 8
>>> Before the
>>> FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
>>> Washington, D.C. 20554
>>> In the Matter of )
>>> )
>>> Implementation of Sections 716 and 717 of the ) CG Docket No. 10-213
>>> Communications Act of 1934, as Enacted by the ) Twenty-First Century
>>> Communications and Video ) Accessibility Act of 2010 )
>>> )
>>> )
>>> Petition for Waiver of Sections 716 and 717 ) of the Communications
>>> Act and Part 14 of the ) Commission’s Rules Requiring Access to )
>>> Advanced Communications Services (ACS) and ) Equipment by People with
>>> Disabilities )
>>> To: Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau PETITION FOR
>>> WAIVER I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
>>> Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 617(h)(1) and 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 14.5, the
>>> Coalition of E-Reader Manufacturers
>>> 1
>>> (hereinafter, “Coalition”) respectfully requests that the
>>> Commission waive the accessibility requirements for equipment used for
>>> advanced communications services
>>> (ACS) for
>>> a single class of equipment: e-readers. This Petition demonstrates
>>> that e-readers are devices designed, built, and marketed for a single
>>> primary purpose: to read written material such as books, magazines,
>>> newspapers, and other text documents on a mobile electronic device.
>>> The
>>> public interest would be served by granting this petition because the
>>> theoretical ACS ability of e- readers is irrelevant to how the
>>> overwhelming majority of users actually use the devices.
>>> Moreover, the features and content available on e-readers are
>>> available on a wide range of multi-
>>> 1 The Coalition of E-Reader Manufacturers consists of
>>> <http://Amazon.com/>Amazon.com, Inc.; Kobo Inc.; and Sony Electronics
>>> Inc.
>>> purpose equipment, including tablets, phones, and computers, all of
>>> which possess integrated audio, speakers, high computing processing
>>> power, and applications that are optimized for ACS.
>>> As explained below, e-readers are a distinct class of equipment
>>> built for the specific purpose of reading. They are designed with
>>> special features optimized for the reading experience and are marketed
>>> as devices for reading. Although they have a similar shape and size to
>>> general-purpose tablet computers, e-readers lack many of tablets’
>>> features for general-purpose computing, including ACS functions.
>>> E-readers simply are not designed, built, or marketed for ACS, and the
>>> public understands the distinction between e-readers and
>>> general-purpose tablets.
>>> Granting the petition is in the public interest because rendering ACS
>>> accessible on e-readers would require fundamentally altering the
>>> devices to be more like general-purpose tablets in cost, form factor,
>>> weight, user interface, and reduced battery life, and yet the
>>> necessary changes, if they were made, would not yield a meaningful
>>> benefit to individuals with disabilities.
>>> II. E-READERS ARE A DISTINCT CLASS OF EQUIPMENT
>>> The Commission requires that a class waiver be applicable to a
>>> “carefully defined”
>>> class
>>> of devices that “share common defining characteristics.”
>>> 2
>>> E-readers are such a class. E-readers, sometimes called e-book
>>> readers, are mobile electronic devices that are designed, marketed and
>>> used primarily for the purpose of reading digital documents, including
>>> e-books and periodicals.
>>> 3
>>> The noteworthy features of e-readers include electronic ink screens
>>> optimized for reading
>>> 2 14 C.F.R. § 14.5(b); Implementation of Sections 716 and 717 of the
>>> Communications Act of 1934, as Enacted by the Twenty-First Century
>>> Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, CG Docket No.
>>> 10-213, WT Docket No. 96-168, CG Docket No. 10-145, Report and Order
>>> and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 26 FCC Rcd 14557, 14639
>>> (2011) [hereinafter ACS Report and Order]; Implementation of Sections
>>> 716 and 717 of the
>>> Communications Act of 1934, as Enacted by the Twenty-First Century
>>> Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, CEA, NCTA, ESA,
>>> Petitions for Class Waivers of Sections 716 and 717 of the
>>> Communications Act and Part 14 of the Commission’s Rules Requiring
>>> Access to Advanced Communications Services (ACS) and Equipment by
>>> People with Disabilities, Order, 27 FCC Rcd 12970, 12973 (2012)
>>> [hereinafter Waiver Order].
>>> 3 “An e-reader is an electronic reading device used to view books,
>>> magazines, and newspapers in a digital format.”
>>> What is an E-Reader?, wiseGEEK,
>>> <http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-E-reader.htm>http://www.wisegeek.c
>>> om/what-is-an-E-reader.htm
>>> (last visited May 16, 2013).
>>> (including in direct sunlight) and designed to minimize eye strain
>>> during extended reading sessions. They also facilitate acquisition of
>>> e-publications and their user interfaces, both hardware and software
>>> features, are designed around reading as the primary user function.
>>> As
>>> explained more fully below, another important aspect of e-readers is
>>> the features they do not contain, which distinguishes them from
>>> general purpose devices such as tablets. Examples of e- readers
>>> include the Amazon Kindle E-Reader, the Sony Reader, and the Kobo Glo.
>>> In 2006, Sony launched the first e-reader available in the U.S.
>>> utilizing electronic ink, and since that time the number of
>>> manufacturers and models has expanded substantially.
>>> 4
>>> Seven
>>> years is a long time in the modern digital age, and the public
>>> understands that although e-readers may be somewhat similar in shape
>>> and size to general-purpose tablets, e-readers are aimed at a specific
>>> function.
>>> 5
>>> The distinctions between e-readers and tablets are explored next.
>>> 4 Michael Sauers, History of eBooks & eReaders, Technology Innovation
>>> Librarian, Nebraska Library Commission, (Oct. 14, 2011),
>>> <http://www.slideshare.net/nebraskaccess/history-of-e-books-ereaders>h
>>> ttp://www.slideshare.net/nebraskaccess/history-of-e-books-ereaders
>>> .
>>> 5 Product buying guides commonly reflect this distinction. See, e.g.,
>>> Brian Barrett,
>>> 5 Ways Ereaders Are Still Better
>>> Than Tablets, Gizmodo (Dec. 12, 2012),
>>> <http://gizmodo.com/5970460/5-ways-ereaders-are-still-better-than-tabl
>>> ets>http://gizmodo.com/5970460/5-ways-ereaders-are-still-better-than-t
>>> ablets
>>> ;
>>> Paul Reynolds, 5 Reasons to Buck the Tide and Buy an E-book Reader,
>>> <http://ConsumerReports.org/>ConsumerReports.org
>>> (Apr. 22, 2013),
>>> <http://news.consumerreports.org/electronics/2013/04/5-reasons-to-buck
>>> -the-tide-and-buy-an-e-book-reader.html>http://news.consumerreports.or
>>> g/electronics/2013/04/5-reasons-to-buck-the-tide-and-buy-an-e-book-rea
>>> der.html
>>> .
>>> Wikipedia, an aggregator of knowledge and therefore a useful measure
>>> of conventional understanding, differentiates e-readers from tablets,
>>> explaining that, among other differences, “[t]ablet computers . . .
>>> are more versatile, allowing one to consume multiple types of content
>>> . . .
>>> .” It states that “[a]n e-book reader, also called an e-book device or
>>> e- reader, is a mobile electronic device that is designed primarily
>>> for the purpose of reading digital e-books and periodicals.”
>>> Wikipedia, E-Book Reader,
>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-reader>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-
>>> reader
>>> (last visited May 16, 2013).
>>> 6 47 C.F.R. § 14.5(a)(ii).
>>> III. E-READERS ARE USED PRIMARILY FOR READING
>>> E-readers are “designed primarily for purposes other than using” ACS.
>>> 6
>>> Specifically,
>>> they are designed to be used for reading.
>>> Moreover, they are marketed as tools for reading, and reading is their
>>> predominant use. Conversely, e-readers are not designed or marketed as
>>> tools for using ACS.
>>> A. E-Readers Are Designed and Marketed for Reading
>>> In contrast to general-purpose tablets, the features in e-readers
>>> are designed and built around reading as the primary function.
>>> Features that e-readers possess for reading optimization
>>> include:
>>> • Screens optimized to reduce eyestrain and prevent glare;
>>> 7
>>> • Low power consumption and extremely long battery life to facilitate
>>> long reading sessions and use during extended travel;
>>> 8
>>> • Navigation that place reading features, including e-publication
>>> acquisition, front and center;
>>> 9
>>> and
>>> • Built-in reading tools such as highlighting, bookmarking, and lookup
>>> f
More information about the BlindLaw
mailing list