I share the view that accessible technology depends on someone high up in a
company to "get it."  Structured negotiations is a method we have used
successfully that has helped find these people in large financial
institutions.  This method uses the law as an important backdrop, but
instead of a lawsuit, collaboration is offered.  Since 1996, when we
started with the banks, blind individuals and advocacy groups have signed
close to 15 legally binding agreements with some of the largest financial
institutions in the country.   As a result of these agreements, there are
now close to 30,000 Talking ATMs, many banks making real progress toward
their express commitments to meet W3C guidelines, and real programs to
provide print information in braille and other alternative
formats.   Structured negotiations can't work for everything, but in the
right context it has proven to be an effective means for finding those
inside that can make the difference.   Lainey


At 08:05 AM 8/28/2004, Tom Fowle wrote:
>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Steve,
>I basically aggree with your take.
>
>the Telecommunications act of 199x or whenever sounded all grand
>and accommodating, but there was the big copout, stuff had to be
>made accessible "where technically feasible."
>
>Its so easy to claim that accessibility isn't technically
>feasible if it might cost them a buck.
>
>Unfortunately I have had many contacts with manufacturers over
>the years trying to get it across to them that building in
>accessibility from the get go isn't hard or expensive.  I have
>had very very few positive responses even when the experience of
>our RERC is offered as free consultation.
>
>About the only time it works is when you can get at someone high
>up in a company who "gets it" and makes it happen.  Even getting
>at the engineers is usually useless, they don't make the
>financial decisions.
>
>I can't say we've had no successes, companies like Viking
>electronics with their accessible building door entry phone
>system are the wonderfull exception that basically proves the
>rule.
>
>It gets in the way of their designers who think all that outside
>stuff will limit their precious creativity.
>
>And besides there is still no real incentive for most companies
>to care.
>
>I think only when there is a 1% inaccessibility tax on anything
>with any visual display that isn't accessible will they start
>caring. Oops, no they'll just pass it along to consumers with a
>little note blaming the ungratefull blind.
>
>and of course a new tax here and now is about as popular as an
>arab American.
>
>Perhaps someone who knows Dr. O'Day  can get at him and find out
>just why this settlement isn't yet another empty promise.
>
>Tom
>
>
>Net-Tamer V 1.13 Beta - Registered
>
>
>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



Lainey Feingold
Law Office of Elaine B. Feingold
1524 Scenic Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94708
(510) 548.5062
mailto:[log in to unmask]


The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended
recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly
prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in
error, please e-mail the sender at [log in to unmask] and delete it
permanently from your computer files.  Thank you.


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