The consequence of which was forcing an organization to choose between spending an enormous amount of money, or making a previously free resource unavailable. How is this a good thing?
> If there is no penalty for not making them available for the deaf, why would any institution pay for captioning?
Do you realize the insanity of that kind of logic? If there is no penalty for not curing HIV, how can McDonald's sell hamburgers? Where does it end?
> If there is no penalty for not making them available for the deaf, why would any institution pay for captioning?
Do you realize the insanity of that kind of logic? If there is no penalty for not curing HIV, how can McDonald's sell hamburgers? Where does it end?