Anyone else notice that HTC forgot to add accessibility apps?

[Squintz82]

Really?


Listing an accessibility menu, with no way to use it isn't false advertising? Please explain.

Thats not unlike listing an icon for an internet browser, yet it not actually be there.

Surely the Verizon reps aren't telling people "Oh, ignore that menu, its just for looks".

To establish that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

I won't go into detail about everything regarding the issue, nor am I looking to create an argument. This is just what I understand about false advertising and deceptive trade practices. FWIW, I am a marketing graphic designer for a major consumer electronics company. Everything I do day-to-day is reviewed by legal for the exact reasons we're talking about, so I have a small amount of experience with this part of the law, but I'm not a lawyer, so I very well may be wrong.

HTC nor Verizon uses this feature as a selling point for the phone. You are free, and encouraged, to try the phone out in stores prior to purchasing. The missing items weren't statements HTC or Verizon FALSELY claimed about to get you to purchase the phone. Therefore, I do not think this would even make it to court under a False Advertising or Deceptive Trade Practices basis.

 

[adrynalyne]

What would the suit be based on?

Whining.....Very popular these days..:icon_eek:

If you can't contribute, please don't post.

 

[adrynalyne]

Really?


Listing an accessibility menu, with no way to use it isn't false advertising? Please explain.

Thats not unlike listing an icon for an internet browser, yet it not actually be there.

Surely the Verizon reps aren't telling people "Oh, ignore that menu, its just for looks".

To establish that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

I won't go into detail about everything regarding the issue, nor am I looking to create an argument. This is just what I understand about false advertising and deceptive trade practices. FWIW, I am a marketing graphic designer for a major consumer electronics company. Everything I do day-to-day is reviewed by legal for the exact reasons we're talking about, so I have a small amount of experience with this part of the law, but I'm not a lawyer, so I very well may be wrong.

HTC nor Verizon uses this feature as a selling point for the phone. You are free, and encouraged, to try the phone out in stores prior to purchasing. The missing items weren't statements HTC or Verizon FALSELY claimed about to get you to purchase the phone. Therefore, I do not think this would even make it to court under a False Advertising or Deceptive Trade Practices basis.

Oh I am not looking to argue, just trying to understand. I'm not saying anyone's opinion here is right or wrong.


What about discrimination against those with disabilities?

 

[Squintz82]

Cool, just making sure it didn't turn into an argument

As for discrimination against those with disabilities, I don't really have any experience with that since I mostly work with the web. But it seems like something that may be fixed with an update.

Also, a lot of this may be covered in the Terms of Service we agree to when we buy a phone and service with Verizon. Verizon and the phone manufacturers may be protected. However, I've never actually read the entire thing, lol.

 

[adrynalyne]

Thanks for the discussion

 

[gatorbait]

What about discrimination against those with disabilities?

Typically, a private company does not need to conform their products to be usable by those with disabilities.

Also, the presence of a menu option on a phone does not in itself even constitute advertising.

I appreciate that you are trying to think outside of the box, but I typically find that laypeople typically make over broad assumptions on what is covered under specific claims for damages.

 

[adrynalyne]

I didn't make any assumptions, bud.

I posted this for input from others.

Both HTC and Verizon are listing the phone as having features for those with disabilities, but I do not know if they are referring to what is normally under this menu.

 

[gatorbait]

I didn't make any assumptions, bud.

I posted this for input from others.

Both HTC and Verizon are listing the phone as having features for those with disabilities, but I do not know if they are referring to what is normally under this menu.

Surely you must have been making some basic assumptions to come to the idea that the empty Accessibility menu had potential legal ramifications? Otherwise, why even pose the question? Was there not some basis that made your questions a legitimate point for discussion?

 

[Modshack]

If you can't contribute, please don't post.

Perhaps you can point out, in this spec list from HTC, the features you are being denied and are "falsely advertised" ?

HTC Mobile Phone Support - DROID INCREDIBLE by HTC (Verizon) - Tech Specs

 

[adrynalyne]

I didn't make any assumptions, bud.

I posted this for input from others.

Both HTC and Verizon are listing the phone as having features for those with disabilities, but I do not know if they are referring to what is normally under this menu.

Surely you must have been making some basic assumptions to come to the idea that the empty Accessibility menu had potential legal ramifications? Otherwise, why even pose the question? Was there not some basis that made your questions a legitimate point for discussion?

My question was, can HTC be sued? Thats not an assumption, thats a question. As assumption would mean I have already made my mind up and am looking for confirmation, which is clearly not the case. The only assumption I've made, if you want to call it that, is that HTC made a mistake by not including those apps, and/or leaving an empty menu, and instead sending out a nonsense OTA update that could have remedied it as well.

 

[adrynalyne]

If you can't contribute, please don't post.

Perhaps you can point out, in this spec list from HTC, the features you are being denied and are "falsely advertised" ?

HTC Mobile Phone Support - DROID INCREDIBLE by HTC (Verizon) - Tech Specs

Read the thread again please, and come back when you know whats being discussed. I am looking for discussion, not some silly argument you are trying to turn this into.

Edit:

I'll quote myself.

Both HTC and Verizon are listing the phone as having features for those with disabilities, but I do not know if they are referring to what is normally under this menu.

You have been left behind in this conversation. By the way, I never said I was denied anything. I don't use these features, and when I get the opportunity, will be disabling this menu so I don't have to stare at it.

 

[BewareOfButtlice]

What accessibility options would they put in there anyway? So that the blind could be read what is on the screen at what precise inch it is X and Y exc exc????

If HTC got sued for this then i would sue comcast for having picture in picture options on the remote then when you press them it says "reserved for later use" or whatever. What could they possibly get sued for? Teasing handicapped people? Since when was that illegal?

Im pretty sure there is nothing there because no one has requested anything to be put in there that would make the phone easier to use if you were visually impaired or something.

 

[adrynalyne]

Are you a new Android user?

These options have been around since (at least) 1.6. Check the Droid's menu if you have one.

As I mentioned in the beginning this is not about whether you see a use for the option or not.

Having a multi use remote is not the same as having an empty menu in a phone. I think we can all agree on that.

 

[littlerick]

my moto droid says the same thing, accessibility but its grayed out too

 

[adrynalyne]

my moto droid says the same thing, accessibility but its grayed out too

Run a stock rom.