The following information is provided by DREDF (Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund)www.dredf.org:

Dear Friends,

DREDF has a great victory to share with you: We've secured a historic settlement inNational Association of the Deaf, et al. v. Netflixthat will ensure 100% closed captions in Netflix's ondemand streaming content within two years. DREDF's work firmly establishes a precedent for a critical issue of disability civil rights law: that a web-based business is a place of public accommodation and is covered under Title lll of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Specifically, the settlement benefits people who are deaf and those who are hard of hearing, as well as a growing number of older Americans with hearing loss, who require captions in order to access online streaming video. As DREDF Directing Attorney Arlene Mayerson said, "For people who are deaf and hard of hearing, captions are like ramps for people who use wheelchairs."

As lead counsel, DREDF alleged that Netflix's "Watch Instantly" on-demand streaming programming discriminated against people who are deaf and hard of hearing because it did not provide closed captioning on all content. The case not only opens doors to entertainment, but also education, government benefits, employment, and more, as systems are increasingly accessed online.

The National Association of the Deaf, along with theWestern Massachusetts Association of the Deaf and HearingImpaired(WMAD/HI) and Lee Nettles, a deaf Massachusetts resident, brought suit against entertainment giant Netflix in 2010 to secure a commitment to provide closed captioning for "Watch Instantly" movies and television streamed on the Internet.

The case resulted in a precedentsettingConsent Decreefiled on October 10, 2012, which will increase access for the 48 million Americans who are deaf and hard of hearing to movies and television streamed on the Internet, one of the fastest growing entertainment venues in the country. The Consent Decree requires Netflix to provide captions on all streamed programming by 2014.

The case is notable for establishing that the ADA applies to online-only businesses, a critical issue as society moves from accessing services on Main Street to the Internet. To state a claim under Title III of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that the alleged discrimination involves the services of a "place of public accommodation."

In the motions leading up to the Consent Decree, DREDF successfully argued that Netflix's Watch Instantly website is a place of public accommodation by analogizing Netflix's service to that of a brick-and-mortar store or other venue that provides similar services, such as a video rental store. In hisOrder to Netflix's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Federal District Court Judge Michael Ponsor rejected Netflix's argument that Title III did not include entities like websites or streaming services on grounds that when the ADA was written web-based services did not exist and could not have been explicitly included:

"In a society in which business is increasingly conducted online, excluding businesses that sell services through the Internet from the ADA would run afoul of the purposes of the ADA and would severely frustrate Congress's intent that individuals with disabilities fully enjoy the goods, services, privileges and advantages, available indiscriminately to other members of the general public."

Moreover, Mayerson convincingly argued that the legislative history of the ADA makes clear that Congress intended the ADA to adapt to changes in technology and that Congress did not intend to limit the ADA to specific examples listed in each category of public accommodations.

Judge Ponsor found that plaintiffs convincingly argued that the website falls within at least one, if not more, of the enumerated ADA categories, including that it is a "service establishment" providing customers with the ability to stream video programming through the internet; a "place of exhibition or entertainment" because it displays movies, television programming, and other content; and a "rental establishment" because it engages customers to pay for the rental of video programming.

The Consent Decree is a model for the streaming entertainment industry, and will also serve as a model to improve access to Internetbased services for deaf and hard of hearing individuals. DREDF is honored to have worked with Lewis, Feinberg, Lee, Renaker & Jackson P.C., and the Boston, MA law firm Sugarman, Rogers, Barshak & Cohen, P.C. on this case.