WASHINGTON-Audiovox Communications Corp. and Verizon Wireless are in settlement talks with a blind woman who earlier this year filed a complaint against the two firms at the Federal Communications Commission, alleging the companies violated disability provisions of the 1996 telecom act.
Lawyers for Verizon Wireless, Audiovox and Dr. Bonnie O’Day submitted a joint statement to the FCC on July 29, notifying the agency of settlement talks and their intention to report back to federal regulators by Sept. 30 on the status of those discussions.
What such a settlement might entail is unclear. What is certain is the stakes for the mobile-phone industry are potentially huge. Just less than two months ago, the FCC ordered wireless firms to gear up to make half of all new mobile phones compatible with hearing aids by 2008.
“The parties continue to engage in settlement negotiations, the contents of which are confidential,” the lawyers stated. “In general, the parties believe that progress is being made, but that further discussions will be needed to determine whether a mutually acceptable settlement can in fact be reached.”
The case is being handled by the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau.
Dr. Bonnie O’Day claimed in a Feb. 21 complaint she could not use her Audiovox phone because many features, such as caller ID and one-touch dialing, were delivered through visual display. What she said she needed, as a person who cannot read a small phone screen, are more audio prompts. There are approximately 10 million people who are blind or visually impaired in the United States.
O’Day, saying she purchased the Audiovox CDM-9500 as `the best of the worst,’ initially filed an informal complaint at the FCC in June 2001. O’Day said she called Audiovox and Verizon Wireless in hopes they could help her solve the accessibility problem. Instead, she claims, the two wireless firms blamed each other.
Verizon Wireless, the No. 1 mobile-phone carrier in the nation, argues it is not liable because it is not a manufacturer. As such, the wireless carrier says it is not covered by disability access requirements in the telecom act.
O’Day’s lawyers at Spiegel & McDiarmid-who have taken the case on pro bono-reply that Verizon Wireless is not divorced from the manufacturing process. Indeed, Verizon Wireless has acknowledged being a participant in product development.
Audiovox maintains the law-and legislation that gave rise to it-did not intend to force manufacturers to accommodate disabled citizens if a given barrier to accessibility is difficult to achieve.
O’Day’s attorneys say a technological fix is not out of Audiovox’s reach.
The mobile industry insists it is not ignoring disabled consumers.
“Our manufacturers have a variety of different features available on their phones for people with different disabilities, including the visually impaired,” said Travis Larson, a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association.
FCC disability access rules flow from Section 255 of the 1996 telecom act. The law requires manufacturers to ensure that “equipment is designed, developed and fabricated to be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable.”
Telecom service providers, according to the law, “shall ensure that the service is accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable.” Section 255 has roots in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
O’Day’s formal complaint -which has generated volumes of paper in a relatively short time-is the first of its kind since the telecom act was enacted more than seven years ago.
But it might not be the last. As mobile phones-used by 150 million Americans today-continue to supplant traditional landline phones as a primary medium of communication in the United States, consumers, including those with disabilities, are apt to demand accessibility on par with what they have today.
The good news for the mobile-phone industry is that it does not face an across-the-board federal mandate comparable to the new hearing-aid compatibility rule.
However, even if O’Day makes peace with Audiovox and Verizon Wireless, the wireless industry is not necessarily out of the woods. A settlement would only cover the parties involved, based on the specific facts, findings and understandings of the stakeholders. Every wireless carrier and manufacturer-including Audiovox and Verizon Wireless-would remain vulnerable to disability complaints at any given time. On the other hand, the filing of a formal complaint-a serious matter-requires considerable resources.
An FCC spokeswoman said the agency monitors disability access compliance but said there are no plans to address mobile-phone problems identified by O’Day as a policy matter.
