Oh please, they may "have to", but that doesn't mean they won't find a loop whole in order to get away with not doing it.
Jenny On Apr 29, 2012, at 7:47 AM, Sean Murphy wrote: > Hi all. > > > AGain, how can education departments in the USA buy products when they are > not 508 rehab accessible? I thought all governments department in the USa had > to ensure the product is accessible based upon this rehab act or does this > only apply for federal? > > > There is 3 ways to change the thinking of business: > > 1. Demonstrate a market. > 2. Take them to court. Not always a good solution. > 3. Blind people develop a investment fund which invests into proactive > companies in the accessible area. > 4. Awareness education. > > > Oops, I said 3, but there is > > Sean > On 29/04/2012, at 7:24 AM, Eric Oyen wrote: > >> the issue is not the iPad itself, it is the apps that companies develop for >> it. most of those companies don't consider us much of a market (either by >> public perception or flawed fiscal analysis). there had already been one >> debacle involving a pad type computer (kindle) and a major institution >> (Arizona State University) and it was found that the blind were >> specifically locked out. the same is happening with iPad apps (even though >> the SDK tools and API are freely available and easy to incorporate, >> companies will not concede). Its a never ending struggle as those who think >> they know better never do and saddle us with their utter stupidity. there is >> a reason they call this "the tyranny of the stupid". >> >> -eric >> . >> On Apr 28, 2012, at 5:39 AM, Donna Goodin wrote: >> >>> Hi Christine, >>> >>> I'm perplexed. How do you see the push to have iPads in classrooms as >>> something that leaves the blind/VI student out? If anything, I see that as >>> something that better enables us to participate, thanks to the fact that >>> Apple has made the iPad a fully accessible device. >>> Best, >>> Donna >>> On Apr 28, 2012, at 8:36 AM, Christine Grassman wrote: >>> >>>> With all due respect, Scott, laws which disparately impact certain groups >>>> or classes of people have been flouted through civil disobedience since >>>> the introduction of legal systems, e.g., civil rights, disability rights, >>>> employment rights, etc. The United States might not exist were it not for >>>> disobeying laws. >>>> I am an attorney, and it continues to amaze me how slowly the U.S. is >>>> moving to accommodate disability, and how snail-paced the societal shift >>>> in attitudes toward us has been. and it seems that whenever a company >>>> like Apple makes great strides in accommodating blindness off the shelf, >>>> plenty of other technologies come along and do not bother to incorporate >>>> us into their equation. So many educational apps, for example, are not >>>> accessible, though they could be, and given the push now to have iPads in >>>> classrooms, once again blind, visually impaired, and otherwise >>>> print-disabled students will be left out. Apple moves us two steps >>>> forward, and "progress" (for others) moves us three steps back. I should >>>> be able to turn on a television, flip a switch, or turn on a transmitter, >>>> and get descriptions. I should be able to access books on the Nook or the >>>> Kindle, not just iBooks. I cannot express, and I am sure others here >>>> agree, the happiness I feel when a new release or best-selling publication >>>> is available on iBooks. >>>> (Incidentally, if a book is available on iBooks and on bookshare.org, I >>>> purchase the book. Yet, I have lost quite a lot of money as a published >>>> author -- as soon as my book was published, I sent a copy to >>>> bookshare.org; it was more important to me to have it available at the >>>> same time to the blind and print-disabled. The Authors Guild apparently >>>> does not care about such access, despite the fact that they would actually >>>> get money from us.) >>>> >>>> I would happily go to the movies more and happily purchase audio-described >>>> movies through iTunes if they were available. Even movies which are >>>> released with audio description are not always sold through movie >>>> resellers -- goodness knows I have tried. To date, I have only located The >>>> Incredible Hulk, from 2008, which I purchased for my son. >>>> Even Apple could do more. It could strengthen its requirements for apps. >>>> It has provided developers with the means to make their apps VoiceOver >>>> accessible, and there are plenty of apps out there which could be so. Only >>>> apps that are visual by their very nature should be exempted. But, as >>>> usual, profit trumps people, despite the fact that the disabled community >>>> rewards those who remember us with our business. >>>> Frankly, I would prefer to purchase the audio-described movies and shows I >>>> download from the vault, so that I could watch them with sighted friends >>>> and family. I wish I could show a film to a class and not have to ask my >>>> para or a student to tell me what is going on. The entertainment industry >>>> gets plenty of my money. If they want more, they should remember that I >>>> deserve to be able to access their material independently. OK. Topic over. >>>> Those of you who wish to continue this off-list are welcome; I've >>>> appreciated your correspondence thus far. >>>> Christine >>>> On Apr 28, 2012, at 6:13 AM, Scott Howell wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am sure commenting on this only adds fuel to the fire, but I did want >>>>> to point out that as I recall the person that is responsible for this >>>>> movie vault thing also runs a legit company. I would find it difficult to >>>>> believe that he has not checked into this because no one would want to >>>>> put their business assets at risk. If there truly is an investigation >>>>> then prove it. I get pretty annoyed when people claim something, but >>>>> cannot or do not provide any reference to back those claims. And for the >>>>> record I do not condone pirating of any kind and believe that regardless >>>>> of accessibility issues even blind people must follow the laws. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 27, 2012, at 10:51 PM, Christine Grassman wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Naturally, if the moderator deems this discussion verboten, I will >>>>>> refrain further, but I would feel remiss not to point out the following >>>>>> for consideration: >>>>>> 1. As of several hours ago, there was nothing on the FBI's official web >>>>>> site regarding an investigation, nor were there any press releases or >>>>>> other comparable references to an investigation of the movie vault. A >>>>>> reference would be appreciated; mere speculation or rumor could be >>>>>> deemed libelous. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. The problem industries have with illegal file-sharing is loss of >>>>>> revenue. Since, at least in the United States, there is virtually no way >>>>>> to purchase audio-described movies or television shows, the industry is >>>>>> not being cheated of revenue. >>>>>> 3. The files are straight audio, with no ability, for example, to >>>>>> "watch" with sighted peers while having the benefit of the audio >>>>>> description. This is not at all remotely similar to downloading a film >>>>>> for the family to watch. That being said, the vast majority of the >>>>>> sighted community does this with impunity, even though many of the shows >>>>>> and movies they download can be seen for free when they are are shown on >>>>>> television. We, on the other hand, cannot even enjoy full access to >>>>>> these shows when they *are* on television. Either they are not >>>>>> audio-described at all, or it is not easy to turn on the secondary audio >>>>>> channel, or a particular station only carries foreign language >>>>>> broadcasts on the SAC rather than audio description. Comparing access to >>>>>> audio-described movies and shows in mp3 format to the type of >>>>>> file-sharing which goes on 24/7 on hundreds and thousands of sites is a >>>>>> stretch. >>>>>> 4. If the government and/or the involved industries wish to do >>>>>> something about the existence of resources like the movie vault, the >>>>>> former should mandate, and the latter should provide a market from which >>>>>> we can obtain these items. I have been able to watch a non-described >>>>>> movie with others after listening to an mp3 file and tell another blind >>>>>> person what is going on thanks to that previous experience. My two >>>>>> blind children have been able to enjoy fare which their peers enjoyed >>>>>> months or years ago. Until the entertainment industry levels the playing >>>>>> field, I will utilize resources like the movie vault with the same >>>>>> guiltless pleasure I take in bookshare.org (and, by the way, it is >>>>>> possible to download books from bookshare.org which are available >>>>>> commercially.) We cannot use the Kindle as others do. WE cannot use the >>>>>> Nook. We are severely limited in what we can access independently when >>>>>> it comes to entertainment, and we must even still fight for access to >>>>>> education at every level, despite technological advances. Holding us to >>>>>> the same standards as the vast majority of illegal file-sharers is >>>>>> legally, morally, and economically inequitable. >>>>>> >>>>>> Christine >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
