Back in July one of the law-tech listservs I read had a flurry of posts about a discrimination lawsuit being brought by students and the National Federation of the Blind against Arizona State University. (Teknoids) The lawsuit alleged that the pilot program to distribute textbooks via the Kindle DX violated the Americans with Disability Act, section 504. The ASU University Technology Officer posted a press release about the pilot program on May 6, 2009. The comments from students there debated many of the pros and cons of the program, including the issue of accessibility for blind students. While the KindleDX does offer text to speech capability, and allows users to zoom the print size, choose high contrast fonts and colors, none of its operational menus or navigation mechanisms are included in the text to speech function. So the Kindle offers great advantages to the sighted and to those with low vision, not to mention those who might have disability issues that prevent them holding heavy textbooks; however, users who are blind are completely unable to make use of the reader. The discrimination suit was filed on June 25, 2009. (The full text of the filing is available at http://www.shandrow.com/kindle/complaint.txt)
Watching the blogosphere about this one has been interesting. Many first reactions are ‘well, books aren’t accessible to the blind either’, followed by ‘Amazon has no obligation to make its hardware totally accessible to every kind of possible disability out there’, to dire prognostications about the chilling effect this will have on technological innovation. Many complain about the extra cost for everybody to subsidize a very small set of users. Others do comment that while Amazon may not be obligated, Universities are obligated by the ADA to make sure that technology adopted does not disadvantage those with disabilities. Some with detailed knowledge of the underlying technology are dumbfounded as to why the accessibility wasn’t built-in in the first place.
Just last week three schools announced that they will not deploy the Kindle specifically because of the disability issue. (NFB news page) An opinion piece by a student at the University of Wisconsin sparked many comments where all these issues are raised again, especially the argument that to avoid disadvantaging the few, we are disadvantaging the many. (Badger Herald) As we at Penn State University Libraries consider offering materials in e-book format, and adopting potential readers these same issues are definitely being considered. (PSUL White Paper) Is the Sony Reader any more accessible? If not, should we avoid any reader until there is at least one that is accessible?
As part of the part of the dialogue, where would you draw the line?
