[Draft] A Cautionary Tale of Inaccesibility:
Target Corporation

Resources for Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for Your Organization provides case studies showing the positive business benefits of accessibility. This page is an example of negative consequences of not making your website accessible.

“This settlement marks a new chapter in making websites accessible to the blind.”

(Bruce Sexton, Jr (member), NFB⁵)

About the business

Target corporation originated in 1902 under the banner of the Dayton Dry Goods Company; the name Target was not adopted until 60 years later when the Dayton Company opened the first outlet bearing that name. Today Target operates some 1600 stores throughout the continental United States as well as Hawaii and Alaska, offering discount consumer products and recently launching fresh food offerings and general groceries nationwide. In 1999 Target moved into online sales with the launch of Target.com, and in 2005 Target broke the $50 billion annual sales barrier.²

Site visitor numbers

Approximately 934,265 visitors daily ³

What happened?

May 2005

The National Federation of the Blind (NFB), a non-profit organisation representing blind people in the United Sates, based in Baltimore, Maryland, put it to Target Corporation that their website Target.com was not accessible to non-sighted users. Key issues cited were:

• a lack of ALT text on the site
• online purchases could not be completed without the use of a mouse
• image maps to show store locations were inaccessible
• many headings important to navigating the site were missing

Target Corporation would not commit to any action to remedy this.¹

January 2006

The NFB submit a case that Target.com's lack of accessibility is in breach of:

• the California Unruh Civil Rights Act requiring any business establishment of any kind to be accessible if doing business in California
• the California Disabled Persons Act requiring any public place 'and other places to which the public are invited' to be accessible
• the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requiring any places of public accommodaton to be accessible to the disabled (including Target stores of which Target.com is a service)¹

September 2006

A San Francisco Federal Judge rules that the lawsuit can proceed past Target Corporation's motions to dismiss the case, finding that Target.com's services are integrated with those of Target Stores and so inaccessibility of the website does discriminate against non-sighted users in breach of the ADA.⁴

Results

• Target Corporation settles the class action lawsuit from NFB in August 2008 and agrees to pay damages of $6 million.⁵
• The ruling set a landmark precedent for online retailers to incorporate accessibility measures into their websites or else run the risk of being found similarly discriminatory towards disabled users.
• The settlement required Target's progress in making the Target Web site accessible to be monitored by the NFB, and that the site be fully accessible by by February 28, 2009.⁷
• The National Federation of the Blind is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs, but the exact amount of said fees and costs has not yet been determined.⁷
• NFB's attorney's fees and costs werepaidby Target and came to x million [SHAWN TO PROVIDE]. Target'sown legal costshave not been published.

References

1. Out-Law.com, February 2006. Target sued over web accessibility (http://bit.ly/17TPnA)
2. Target Corporation, September 2009 (accessed). Target: Our History (http://bit.ly/2YNMjA)
3. Web Traffic Agents, September 2009 (accessed). Target.com Site Metrics (http://bit.ly/1y5nWH)
4. Sliwa C & Rosencrance L, September 2006. Court: Accessibility lawsuit against Target can proceed (http://bit.ly/knq6e)
5. Magain M, August 2008. Target Settles Accessibility Lawsuit for $6 Million (http://bit.ly/6pjQc)
6. Holding R, October 2006. Missing the target (http://bit.ly/teHZY)
7. Disability Rights Advocates 2008. National Federation of the blind v. Target