Slashdot Mirror
Prenda's Old Copyright Trolls Are Suing People Again
New submitter Hokan writes: Paul Hansmeier and John Steele, formerly of Prenda, are suing again. Each have started nonprofits, in Minnesota and Illinois, claiming to defend disabled people, and they are suing small businesses for ADA violations. You may recall that a District Court judge issued sanctions against Prenda for their attempts to file copyright suits against a broad swath of internet users. Their new practices take a similar tack: sue a small business and generously offer to collect a settlement somewhat lower than the amount it would cost to to make changes to their establishment. A new group is fighting back by creating "an access audit for local businesses, allowing them to develop a plan to fix ADA issues and potentially to ward off litigation."
...most websites are an accessibility nightmare.
Given that they're all probably not disabled, I'm wondering what grounds they have to sue in the first place. But that's why they offer a "settlement" that's less than the cost to defend the suit, so the case never sees the inside of a courtroom. In effect, though, they're using the legal system to extort money out of people and depending on the particulars, that may qualify under RICO statutes. In theory, they might actually be breaking the law.
Yeah all the hippies are moving to Texas demanding we change our laws to fit their lifestyle never comprehending it was those laws that forced businesses to close thus forcing them to move to Texas where businesses are thriving.
If you pass sledgehammer legislation like the ADA, common sense behavior gets replaced with lawyering and bad things happen. And the people who passed the legislation in the first place say that their intentions were good, blame lawyers and blame the people who opposed the legislation in the first place, and finally call for more legislation to fix the problems that the first legislation caused.
This is the result:
https://regulatorystudies.colu...
This sort of abuse is rampant with the ADA. It's designed to be abused because it allows private parties to sue in a weird not quite Qui Tam type lawsuit to get people to fix up their buildings. In fact, there are disabled people who make a living by parasitically going from store to store suing the Hell out of small businesses like this.
Is greater accessibility good? Yeah, but it should be brought about through tax credits and government officials initiating action. The money recovered should go into coffers to fund tax credits for businesses that want/need help complying, not lining some disabled, lawyer-loving parasite's wallet or writing a private attorney's paycheck.
It's NOT a simple question because it depends on what software they are using, as I described. The software authors can make it do anything or not do anything they want.
Using your analogy, it would be like different brands of wheelchairs are capable of different things. When a building is being designed, it would have to target a series of wheelchair features to accommodate such wheelchairs. But if those wheelchair features are unknown and change every year, then it's a moving and fuzzy target.
And the rude tone of your request is unhelpful. It has no practical purpose. If you are an expert, then simply supply the reader with your grand knowledge rather than insult people.
Table-ized A.I.