amazon?

[Linux for blind general discussion]

really?
Can you direct me to any press on this?  why them and not pizza hut or 
paypal  or another company?  Is the access rooted in wacg 2.0? or the far  less 
productive focus on a specific access tool, a concept which itself 
violates wacg 2.0?


On Sun, 25 Aug 2019, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:

> And yet Domino's is being sued because their web site and app is not 
> accessible.
>
>
> I agree with you but that doesn't mean law suits should never be filed.
>
>
> -- 
> Christopher (CJ)
> Chaltain at Gmail
>
>
> On 8/25/19 4:21 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
>>  The problem is most of us don't have money to hire lawyers. You'd be
>>  amazed how many people are screwed over, shoved aside and ignored because
>>  they lack the money, connections and clout to do anything. Companies
>>  aren't going to listen to a few, or even a few hundred customers, unless
>>  there's a clear advantage for them. That's why a lot of these complaints
>>  never go anywhere.
>>
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  From: Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list at redhat.com>
>>  To: blinux-list at redhat.com
>>  Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 16:18:37 -0500
>>  Subject: Re: amazon?
>> 
>> >  I agree litigation should be a final step, but there are also certain
>>  sections of the blindness community who don't think law suits should
>>  ever be used, and IMHO, this is just another extreme that should be
>>  avoided. If a company isn't following the law, and nothing else is
>>  working, then law suits are a perfectly reasonable tool.
>> 
>> 
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Blinux-list mailing list
>>  Blinux-list at redhat.com
>>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>
> -- 
> Christopher (CJ)
> Chaltain at Gmail
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>
>