Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> If you are building a system that is focused on a specific audience, i.e you're building a video site not intended for those with disabilities

That in itself would be discriminatory, excluding people belonging to a protected class (i.e. people with disabilities).

The law does not apply to personal sites, it applies to "places of public accommodation." Most court case outcomes have agreed that it's not only physical places, websites and apps of businesses are included.

A private club might be exempt but I'm sure there are limitations on what can be a private club; i.e. Dollar Shave Club can't call themselves a private club so their website can be inaccessible to people with disabilities.

> As a somewhat contrived example, are Spotify required to provide captions/lyrics with each song they stream?

Probably lyrics, which are basically a transcript, they wouldn't have to be synchronized to the music, as captions are. The law requires "reasonable accommodations" to be made and lyrics to songs are readily available from the rights holders; if those rights holders wanted a lot more money for the lyrics along with the songs, that could be an undue burden on Spotify and mean they don't have to do it.

I thought Pornhub hosted videos uploaded by users. If they're just a platform, they shouldn't be liable for the lack of captions. The article mentions there is a section for captioned videos (though I wonder if they're actually subtitles translating a language, not captions for the hearing-impaired) so I assume their video player supports caption files.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: