[From article]
In the original complaint, the plaintiffs cited Youtube videos, podcasts, and edX courses—part of a joint venture between Harvard and MIT—as examples of Harvard’s online content that purportedly deny access to deaf and hard-of-hearing people.
The complaint alleges that Harvard has violated the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the American Disabilities Act of 1990 by not inserting digital captions into online educational content. The former mandates that federally-funded educational institutions provide equal access to all individuals, regardless of disabilities. The latter law mandates that public places of accommodation “not deny persons with disabilities” their services.
Harvard sought to delay or dismiss the case until the U.S. Department of Justice issued specific digital provisions of the ADA given the lack of current legal precedence for online public spaces.
Interpretations of the ADA have varied since the original law went into effect in 1990, according to Caroline Jackson, an attorney for the National Association of the Deaf.
“Back then, public life was tangible. It was the stores you could walk into, it was the sidewalks you could get on, it was the doctors that you could go see in person,” Jackson said. “Since then, public sphere has become intangible; it’s become the cybersphere.”
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/2/25/harvard-lawsuit-deaf-proceed/
Judge Recommends that Disability Lawsuit Proceed
By MARELLA A. GAYLA,
Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
February 25, 2016
February 25, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment