Web and Industry

companies facing lawsuits

  • 2018. Bishop v. Amazon.com, Inc.
  • 2018. Braulio Thorne v. Rolex Watch
  • 2018. Luc Burbon v. Fox News Network
  • 2018. Maria Mendizabal, et al. v. Burger King
  • 2017 - 2018. Maria Mendizabal v. Nike Inc.
  • 2018. Sullivan v. CNN America, Inc.
  • 2018. Thorne v. Porsche Design of America Inc.
  • 2018. Lopez v. The Hershey Company, Inc.
  • 2018. Lopez v. Nintendo of America, Inc.
  • 2018. Lopez v. Pandora Ecomm, LLC;
  • 2018. Duncan v. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.
  • 2018. Camacho v. Bed Bath Beyond Inc.
  • 2018. Sullivan v. Dow Jones Company, Inc.
  • 2018. Duncan v. City National Bank
  • 2018. Duncan v. Bank of China
  • 2018. Duncan v. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China USA, National Association
  • 2018. Bishop v. Signature Bank
  • 2018. Marett v. Armel Tax and Accounting Services.
  • 2017. Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
  • 2017. Kmart
  • 2017. McDonald's
  • 2017. Grubhub
  • 2017. Empire Today
  • 2017. Access Now
  • 2017. Inc. v. Blue Apron
  • 2017. Reed v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
  • 2017. Gorecki v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
  • 2017. Robles v. Domino's Pizza
  • 2016. National Association of the Deaf v. Hulu
  • 2016. Gomez v. J. Lindeberg USA, LLC.
  • 2016. Edward Davis v. Bag'n Baggage
  • 2016. Aleeha Dudley v. Miami University
  • 2015. Jose Del-Orden v. Reebok
  • 2015. Robert Jahoda v. NBA
  • 2015. US Department of Justice v. the National Museum of Crime and Punishment
  • 2015 US Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights v. Higley Unified School District
  • 2015. National Association of the Deaf v. Harvard
  • 2015. MIT
  • 2015 Mary West v. eHarmony
  • 2015. Ashley Cwikla v. Bank of America
  • 2015. Access Now Inc. v. Ace Hardware
  • 2014. National Federation of the Blind v. US Department of Education
  • 2013. Bazyn, Brown, et al. v. Safeway
  • 2013. National Federation of the Blind v. HRB Digital LLC
  • 2012. National Association for the Deaf v. Netflix
  • 2012. National Federation of the Blind v. Walt Disney
  • 2012. Kit Lau v. Charles Schwab
  • 2010 US Department of Justice v. Hilton Worldwide Inc.
  • 2009. American Council of the Blind, et al. v. Staples
  • 2009 American Council of the Blind, et al. v. CVS
  • 2008 National Federation of the Blind v. Target
  • 2008. American Council of the Blind, et al. v. Rite Aid
  • JetBlue Airways in 2010;
  • Quizno's;
  • Arby's;
  • T.G.I Friday's;
  • Red Lobster;
  • Sizzler;
  • Supercuts;
  • Bath & Body Works;
  • J.C. Penney

website under investigation

  • Van Buren County, AR;
  • Merced County, CA;
  • City of Fort Morgan, CO;
  • City of Port St. Lucie, FL;
  • Fort Meyers, FL;
  • Jacksonville, FL;
  • City of Vero Beach, FL;
  • Atlanta, GA;
  • Glynn County, GA;
  • Randolph County, GA;
  • Stewart County, GA;
  • Lumpkin County, GA;
  • City of Cedar Rapids, IA;
  • Village of Midlothian, IL;
  • St. Clair County, IL;
  • Champaign County, IL;
  • City of Dekalb, IL;
  • LaPorte County, IN;
  • City of Independence, KS;
  • The Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, KS;
  • Humboldt, KS;
  • Daviess County, KY;
  • Norfolk County, MA;
  • Town of Swansea, MA;
  • City of North Adams, MA;
  • City of Muskegon, MI;
  • City of Kansas City, MO;
  • City of Poplarville, MS;
  • Robeson County, NC;
  • Wilmington, NC;
  • County of Wilson, NC;
  • Fargo, ND;
  • San Juan County, NM;
  • City of Ruidoso, NM;
  • City of Fallon, NV;
  • Chautauqua County, NY;
  • City of Niagara Falls, NY;
  • Town of Poestenkill, NY;
  • Madison County, NY;
  • Town of Vian, OK;
  • Fayette County, PA;
  • Lancaster County, PA;
  • Schuylkill County, PA;
  • City of Newport, RI;
  • Providence, RI;
  • City of West Columbia, SC;
  • City of the Isle of Palms, SC;
  • Pennington County, SD;
  • Gregg County, TX;
  • Upshur County, TX;
  • City of Wills Point, TX;
  • City of Galveston, TX;
  • McClennan County, TX;
  • Nueces County, TX;
  • City of Parowan, UT;
  • Smyth County, VA;
  • Fairfax County, VA;
  • Warrenton, VA;
  • Yakima County, WA;
  • City of Madison, WI.


As a professional company that offers specific services on web content accessibility compliance, at W3CAG, we advice our clients to first of all get a audit done of their web content to assess where they stand. The audit shows if their web content is accessible to their entire target audience. In case it is not, experts will remediate content as per the WCAG to make it accessible to all.

Sometimes, business owners postpone the decision of converting their non accessible content thinking about the cost of the job. However, it can potentially cost them a lot of money and reputation in case they are caught on the wrong side of the law. WCAG DIY articles and videos could help a business owner understand why compliance to web accessibility is important, and what it involves. However, making the actual changes on a website code needs expertise. A poorly performed WCAG compliance can cost a business owner a lot more than paying once for an expert and reliable service.

How to validate if a webpage is accessibility supported or not?

The WCAG has listed some clear techniques which may be followed in order to make web content accessible to more users. Even beyond the techniques mentioned in the WCAG document, there can be several other ways to present content on a webpage that is supported by assistive technologies to read, hear or decipher content that the disabled users may not decipher in its original format on the web page. Hence, the WCAG 2.1 (the latest version of the document) techniques are not binding on any webmaster, nor is it comprehensive since it does not cover the newer technologies (the working group takes time to test newer technologies and so may lag behind).

That said, there are some success criterion laid down by the WAI with different conformance levels that a web page must meet or satisfy to be WCAG complaint. These different levels (A, AA and AAA) are classified primarily on their impact on a web page's design layout and presentation of content. Level A conformance lists the basic design and presentation techniques in order for a webpage's content to be easily read and accessed by assistive technologies. This first level has the minimum impact on web page design. As you move on to AA conformance level and beyond, the complexity increases, and so does the success criterion, restraining web designers to take creative liberties with presentation of content.

So, for existing content on the web that is not accessible or that fails the success criterion of WCAG, there two steps to be taken: 

  • Auditing existing web pages and evaluating content, and
  • Remediating content complying with the WCAG document making them accessible to all.

 This exercise, in most cases, is likely to impact the web page's design layout and content presentation.

A little more understanding of the Three Levels of WCAG Conformance - A, AA and AAA.

Level A lists the minimum level of web content accessibility with the simplest changes out of the three conformance levels. Level A requires that any non text content has a text alternative, like captions for video and audio files, and description for images. In terms of content structure, it is recommended that the content layout is consistent through the page, with clear titles and is listed under bullet points or simply in a logical structure in meaningful order. Other requirements include, avoiding instructions using solely one sense, and not relying on colours alone in presenting graphical illustrations. It also asks that audio is not played automatically, that there is a user control for moving content and all functions be accessible through keyboard. The purpose of the links in a page is clear from the its context, and that pages have an assigned language. These and some more make up the first level of conformance. As the basic and first benchmark for content accessibility, the impact of level A conformance is limited and it may not achieve broad accessibility for many users with complex disabilities.

Level AA is the next and intermediate conformance level. As such, this level lays down some stricter guidelines in order for the content to be accessible to more number of users with more complex disabilities. This level of compliance would allow more mature interaction with assistive technologies. AA level of conformance as per the WCAG requires that live videos have captions, and there be an audio description for video content. The minimum contrast ratio between the page's text and its background required is set to 4.5:1. The text size should be resizable to 200% without design loss. The web page should not use images of texts, offer several ways to search pages, use clear headings, consistent menus, icons and buttons, as well reduce errors by suggesting fixes for user errors. AA level of conformance is aimed at simplifying the disabled user's interaction with the web page making access to information easier as well as enhance their user experience.

Level AAA offers the highest levels of conformance and aims to make content highly accessible to assistive technologies and other user agents to translate information to users with disability. The requirements of the this level enhance some of the standards set in Level A and AA, as well as some more guidelines to make content more accessible. For example, level AAA needs all video files to include sign language translations, as well as detailed audio description for audio files, text alternatives to live audio and videos, the text to background ratio increased to 7:1, offer a wide range of presentation options to the user, and limit accessibility to keyboard only. It also asks that there be no use of images for text, no time limits for users nor any interruption, saving user data while re-authenticating,  let users know their location in the website, include clear headings for every content piece, explaining uncommon words and abbreviations, simplifying the reading level to nine years of schooling, offer help for hard to pronounce words, and offer help or instructions to users and reduce input errors.

Although, the third level AAA offers the highest and strictest standards of conformance, yet the Working group acknowledges that it may not be possible for all websites or web pages to conform to that level due to multiple reasons from legal rights to other reasons. The W3C in its Note 2 of Understanding Conformance states that:

Note 2: It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA Success Criteria for some content. Therefore, broadly speaking, conforming to AA level is a good standard to maintain for most web pages.

The cost of converting to a WCAG compliant website depends on the website size and complexity of functions. A simple website could cost as less as $200, while a big website will layers of complex coding and functionalities could a few thousand dollars. However, you may safely believe that this is a business investment worth making. Not only does it make your business legally compliant, it also opens your doors to a wider audience, and makes you a responsible business owner who stands for equality of all, regardless of a physical or cognitive disability.

Websites that Comply to WCAG:

  • Reach out to more Audience.
  • Consider everyone as equals.
  • Have better visitor experience.
  • Are Legally safe.
  • Are ahead of the competition.
  • Are owned by responsible and sensitive human beings.

How to start making your website WCAG compliant?

Start by taking a WCAG validity test on the Home page to know if your website's content can be accessible to all users. If yes, you are covered, and need not worry about your website from the perspective of WCAG at all. If you fail the W3CAG compliance test, give us a call or fill out a small form, so we can email you a quick quotation to upgrade your website to a WCAG compliant website.

For an average simple website of about 10 pages, we usually charge between $200 to $500. The range is because the cost depends on what kind of content your website uses like, images, videos etc.


The Surf-By Lawsuit Has Officially Found Its Way To The School Industry

Nov 30, 2018

Winery Websites Must Comply

Earlier this year, we published an article warning that websites have become the new hotbed of litigation brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and that schools across the country should take note ("Your School Could Be One Click Away From A Lawsuit"). It appears our warning was a timely one. A recent lawsuit filed against a vocational school in New York marks what we believe will serve as just the beginning of an onslaught of website accessibility complaints targeting public and private school websites.

Read More..

Winery Websites Must Comply With The Americans With Disability Act, But How?

Nov 12, 2018

Winery Websites Must Comply

That ambiguity put fifteen New York wineries in a pickle after Kathy Wu of Brooklyn filed suit. Visually impaired, Wu uses screen-reading software that provides her access to website content. The suit claims the websites of some named New York wineries based in the Hudson Valley and on Long Island are in violation of ADA rules by not making e-commerce, wine club membership, reservations, hours of operation and winery location available through compatible screen-reading features.

Read More..

Lawsuits targeting business websites over ADA violations are on the rise

Nov 11, 2018

Lawsuits targeting business websites over ADA violations are on the rise

The boutique Avanti Hotel is known for its poolside, dog-friendly rooms. Yet its website uses the valuable opening page not to highlight the Palm Springs inn's amenities, but to explain, in stark black letters on a plain white background, that the Avanti violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Read More..

Winery Websites and ADA Compliance

Nov 5, 2018

Winery Websites and ADA Compliance

The recent news of lawsuits filed against New York wineries has caused industry members to ask if they face any litigation risk if their websites are not accessible to people with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The answer is "maybe." There is considerable ambiguity in the law as to which companies are required to make their websites ADA-compliant and what actually constitutes ADA compliance.

Read More..

Letter from Congress could affect local industry around ADA lawsuits

Jul 11, 2018

Letter from Congress could affect local industry around ADA lawsuits

Over the years, Manhattan attorney Jeffrey Gottlieb reckons he has brought more than 100 lawsuits against companies that haven't made their websites usable by the blind. Although federal law prohibits plaintiffs from collecting large amounts of damages, the cases are so irksome to the business community that Congress is asking the Trump administration to crack down on them.

Read More..

Is your website ADA compliant? A brief look at the current legal status

Jun 29, 2018

Is your website ADA compliant

Websites too face regulatory issues around compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other rules involving accessibility and accommodation. In this Insight, we provide a brief overview of the state of laws and rules around website accessibility in the US, including the position taken by the Department of Justice that the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to public-facing websites utilized by places of public accommodation; the current status of proposed regulatory action to establish regulatory standards for website accessibility; and the developing judicial guidance.

Read More..

view more