Re: captcha

I find it hard to believe it's against the law for an individual or
non-commercial/non-business group to make an inaccessible website.
Perhaps for businesses or government agencies, but if the UK has said
that individual sites run by individuals have to be fully accessible,
well, that's just a bit wonky.

Not that I'm against accessibility... I just find the idea of the
legality of what one does on ones own website with regard to
accessibility or inaccessibility to be a bit off.

If this is specifically about the DDA, then according to

http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/PublicWebsite/
public_legalcase.hcsp#P39_3186

I don't believe we have a problem.

"Websites may be covered under the employment provisions, as they may
be a means of advertising jobs; or there may be an intranet which
staff need to use. Websites will most commonly be covered when they
constitute the provision of a service, or they are related to
education."

and the example

“What services are affected by the Act? An airline company provides a
flight reservation and booking service to the public on its website.
This is a provision of a service and is subject to the act.”

So it seems to apply to service oriented businesses or employment
related websites. Even at that it seems to be big brotherish to
me. What it also appears to come down to is it someone is disabled
and feels discriminated against by the website, then they have the
right to sue the owner of the site.

Gavin

On Aug 9, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

>> The wwwmaster backup box is in .uk, and yes, it
> >would be subject to UK law (which iirc came from an EU directive
> so similar laws most likely are/will be enacted elsewhere in Europe).