Note that the statement references the comments the NFB made to the FCC on
video description distributed recently on the list.

kelly

PR Newswire

National Association of Theatre Owners Responds To Recent
Law Suits Filed by
Lawyers for Deaf and Blind Individuals

NORTH HOLLYWOOD, Calif., April 20 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, in Washington
D.C., lawyers representing three hearing impaired
individuals filed suit
against leading movie theatre companies under the Americans
with
Disabilities Act. Earlier this year, similar suits were
filed in Oregon by
lawyers for deaf and blind individuals demanding that
specified technologies

be installed to provide access to their clients. John
Fithian, President of
the National Association of Theatre Owners, stated, "The law
suits are
contrary to the position of leading national disability
rights
organizations, counterproductive to the needs of the
lawyers' clients, and
wholly lacking of legal merit. The nation's movie theatre
owners are proud
of our efforts to bring the magic of movies to our disabled
patrons, and
view these law suits as unfounded attacks on a cooperative
industry."

Mr. Fithian today also released a position paper describing
the
association's concerns. That paper is attached to this statement.

The National Association of Theatre Owners is the largest
motion picture
exhibition trade organization in the world. Here in the
U.S., NATO
represents approximately 70% of the movie screens in the
country, with
screens located in every state in the union. Our voluntary
membership
includes the largest cinema chains and hundreds of
independent theatre
owners too.

POSITION OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF THEATRE OWNERS
REGARDING LAW SUITS BROUGHT BY DEAF AND BLIND INDIVIDUALS

Three hearing impaired individuals in Washington, D.C. today brought
suit against two leading movie theatre companies under the
Americans With
Disabilities Act. Earlier this year, eight deaf individuals
in Oregon sued
four theatre circuits demanding that "rear window"
technology be installed
in theatres. One blind individual also brought legal action,
which would
require installation of a Descriptive Video Service ("DVS")
technology for
blind movie-goers. Both technologies were created and made available
through the same organization, WGBH of Boston,
Massachusetts, under the name
MoPix.

The National Association of Theatre Owners ("NATO") believes
that the
law suits are contrary to the position of leading national
disability rights
organizations, counterproductive to the needs of the
lawyers' clients, and
wholly lacking of legal merit. The nation's movie theatre
owners are proud
of their efforts to bring the magic of movies to our
disabled patrons, and
view these law suits as unfounded attacks on a cooperative industry.

Leading National Disability Rights Organizations Do Not
Support the Law
Suits and Oppose any Legal Mandate of the Technologies
Specified in the
Suits

Brought under the Americans With Disabilities Act, the law
suits attempt
to require movie theatres to install specified equipment to
provide access
to disabled persons. But leading national organizations
dedicated to
improving access to public accommodations for disabled
Americans are not
parties to the law suits; have not announced any support for
the suits; and
indeed either do not endorse the technology demanded by the
plaintiffs in
the suits, or oppose any legal mandate of the technologies
specified in the
suits.

The National Association for the Deaf (NAD), through its
Movie Access
Coalition, has endorsed open captioning as the preferred
technology for the
deaf community, not the rear window technology demanded by
the law suits.
Open captioning allows the viewer to read and watch the
movie as one
experience, with words on the bottom of the screen. Open
captioning works
like subtitles. The rear window technology, a text monitor
as part of a
device attached to the seat, is awkward and expensive.

When a theatre auditorium shows an open captioned film, any
number of
patrons (from one patron to the entire audience, in
concentrated deaf
communities) can enjoy the film. Rear window captioning requires
prohibitively expensive equipment which must be installed on individual
seats.

Likewise, the National Federation of the Blind has adopted a resolution
opposing any legal mandate of audio description technology,
such as
Descriptive Video Service, the technology sought in the
earlier suit. DVS
technology, which offers an audio description of the visual
images on the
screen, provides no assistance to patrons who have been
blind since birth,
since they have no visual memory. Moreover, the audio
descriptions can
distort the artistic integrity of the film.

The law suits, brought by a handful of plaintiffs and their trial
lawyers, do not reflect the attitude of the disabled
community at large.

America's Movie Theatres Have Worked Diligently to Provide Greater
Access to the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Community, and NATO
Has Led the Way
for Open Captioning

In the past two years, six different theatres in six
different cities
have dedicated screens for open captioned films seven days a
week, 52 weeks
of the year. Also in the past two years, 70 different
theatres throughout
the
country have dedicated screens for open captioned films at
least monthly or
bi-monthly. More plans are in the works for more theatres.

Exhibition's trade association, the National Association of Theatre
Owners, has led the way for open captioning. The association
has worked
with its members to expand the number of dedicated screens.
NATO's Vice
President and Executive Director, Mary Ann Grasso, was
honored by Tripod
Captioned Films as their 1999 annual "Friend of Tripod" for
her work in
bringing captioned films to theatres around the country.

Deaf or hard of hearing patrons should work WITH the exhibition
community by supporting the efforts to make theatres more
accessible through
the use of open captioning, not AGAINST exhibition by
bringing unfounded
legal action seeking the wrong solution.

As for blind patrons, until the commencement of the recent litigation,
NATO members had received little or no complaints regarding
access for the
blind.

The Americans With Disabilities Act Does Not Require
Theatres to Install
the Devices Sought by the Law Suits -- The Suits are Wholly
Lacking of Legal

Merit

Under the ADA, public accommodations, including movie
theatres, must
provide access to disabled individuals within certain
parameters. Existing
facilities must be made accessible if the changes are
"readily achievable."

Moreover, auxiliary aids and services are not required if
they would
fundamentally alter the nature of the program or cause an
undue burden on
the operator of the facility. The technology demanded by the
law suits fail
these tests, and are not required by the ADA.

When it passed the ADA, Congress offered guidance on what
type of
auxiliary aids and services would be required, and did not
include the
technologies demanded in the law suits. Indeed, Congress did
specifically
encourage movie theatres to offer some open captioned films,
but did NOT
require that they do so. The conference report, in which
Congress explained
what the ADA meant, states the following:

"Open-captioning, for example, of feature films playing in movie
theatres, is not required by this legislation. Filmmakers
are, however,
encouraged to produce and distribute open-captioned versions
of films and
theaters are encouraged to have at least some pre-announced
screenings of a
captioned version of feature films."

Report 101-116, August 30, 1989, page 64.

If Congress had meant to require the awkward, expensive rear window
technology, why does the legislative history of the ADA
suggest, but not
require, that movie theatres offer open captioned films?

In addition, in the Federal Register (July 26, 1991),
Section 36.303,
the Dept. of Justice states "Movie theatres are not required
to present open
captioned films."

Nor is there any language in the text or legislative history
of the ADA
that requires movie theatres to install DVS technology for
blind patrons.

In sum, NATO and the association's members are proud of our
record, and
will continue our efforts to bring the magic of the movies
to our disabled
patrons. The recent law suits will not succeed on their
legal merits,
demand the wrong technologies, are not supported by leading
national
organizations, and do nothing to improve access for the
disabled community.

For further information on open captioning of films, and the
efforts of
America's movie theatres to expand access to deaf and hard
of hearing
patrons, contact Nancy Linke-Ellis, the Executive Director
of Tripod
Captioned Films at 310-829-3884. For further information on
the position of
the National Federation of the Blind, contact Dr. Harold
Snider at
301-460-4142.


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html