Addressing legal issues with the latest technological developments and social media trends.
Posted

The European Accessibility Act (“EAA”) (Directive (EU) 2019/882) introduces new accessibility requirements that will apply to a wide range of products and services when they are accessible in the EU, aiming to enhance access for persons with disabilities and improve the functioning of the EU single market.

What Does the EAA Seek to Achieve?
The EAA recognizes that the demand for accessible products and services is high, and that the number of persons with disabilities is increasing. An environment where products and services are more accessible has a number of key advantages, not least allowing for a more inclusive society and facilitating independent living for persons with disabilities.

Until now, accessibility rules varied across Member States, creating legal fragmentation and increased compliance burdens for businesses operating cross-border. The EAA seeks to address this by establishing consistent requirements across the EU, allowing companies to scale accessible products and services more efficiently.

For the purposes of the EAA, a “person with disabilities” is defined in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (to which the EU is a party) as “persons who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.”

Who is in Scope?
The EAA applies to manufacturers, importers, and distributors of covered products that are placed on the EU market. From a digital service provider perspective, it applies to those who provide covered services, or make offers to provide such services, to consumers in the EU. This is potentially a wide scope, particularly in the context of websites offering goods for sale to EU-based consumers (who will likely be deemed e-commerce service providers).

Covered Products:

  • Consumer general-purpose computer hardware and their operating systems (e.g., desktops, laptops, smartphones, and tablets)
  • Payment terminals and interactive self-service terminals (e.g. ATMs, check-in kiosks, and ticketing machines)
  • Consumer terminal equipment used for accessing electronic communications and audiovisual media services (e.g., modems, routers, smart TVs, and media streaming devices)
  • E-readers

Covered Services:

  • E-commerce services
  • Electronic communications services (including emergency communications) (e.g., telephone, Voice over IP (“VOIP”), video communications, and messaging services)
  • Services providing access to audiovisual media (e.g., websites, applications, set-top boxes and smart TV services that enable access to audiovisual content)
  • Consumer banking services
  • E-books and associated software
  • Certain passenger transport-related digital interfaces (e.g., websites, mobile apps, ticketing systems for air, bus, rail, and waterborne passenger transport services, with some exceptions)

Notably, e-commerce services will capture websites or mobile applications that facilitate the remote sale of goods or services to consumers—this will capture a large number of websites that incorporate simple consumer-facing webstores. Providers of such websites or applications must comply with detailed accessibility criteria, including making identification, selection, payment, and customer service functions perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust for users with disabilities.

Obligations on Those in Scope
Economic operators will be required to:

  • Ensure that products and services meet the functional accessibility requirements set out in Annex I of the EAA. This includes:
    • General requirements that apply to all products/services (such as making websites and related online applications, and mobile applications, perceivable (e.g., alt-text for images), operable (e.g., using only a keyboard), understandable (e.g., using clear wording) and robust (e.g., that function with assistive technologies)
    • Specific requirements that apply to certain specific services—e.g., ensuring that e-book digital files do not prevent assistive technology from operating properly.
  • Provide accessible instructions, packaging and digital interfaces.
  • Demonstrate conformity through technical documentation and, for products, CE marking.
  • Publish clear accessibility information for services, available in accessible formats (e.g., information assessing how the service meets the accessibility requirements under the EAA should be included in website terms and conditions or equivalent documents).

While there are some exceptions based on a “disproportionate burden” or “fundamental alteration” to the basic nature of the product or service, these must be properly assessed and documented. Authorities can request this information at any time.

For digital services (including e-commerce) the EAA aligns obligations on private companies with the four principles of accessibility set out in existing EU legislation applicable to public sector organizations, namely: perceivability, operability, understandability, and robustness.

The EAA provides for a presumption of compliance where products or services are in conformity with harmonized standards. The European Commission has requested the establishment or revision of a number of harmonized standards, including updating existing harmonized standards for ICT products and services (EN 301 549), although these are not expected to be finalized until after June 28, 2025 when national Member State laws implementing the EAA should be enforceable.

For e-commerce services, the standard is linked to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”) developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (“W3C”), which includes three levels of conformity—level A, AA, and AAA based on the above four principles (perceivability, operability, understandability, and robustness). Examples of requirements under the WCAG include text alternatives to non-text content (e.g., for those who rely on screen readers), captions for audio content (e.g., for those with hearing difficulties), and ensuring websites can be navigated and operated using keyboards alone.

Key Timeline

  • New products and services placed on the market or provided from June 28, 2025 must comply with the accessibility requirements of the EAA (EU Member States’ laws implementing the EAA are required to apply from this date).
  • Existing products used to deliver services may continue until 2030, provided they are not replaced.
  • Existing contracts for services may continue until 2030, provided they are not otherwise altered.
  • Self-service terminals in use before 2025 may remain operational for up to 20 years.

Key Takeaways
In scope businesses should:

  1. Review relevant products and services to determine whether these are in scope and identify the business’ role (e.g., manufacturer, importer, service provider).
  2. Review specific accessibility requirements applicable to the product or services and ensure these are met.
  3. In relation to services (including e-commerce services) ensure that information assessing how the service meets the accessibility requirements is included in general terms and conditions or equivalent documentation.
  4. Review contracts with relevant third parties (e.g., vendors providing related services).
Posted

A recent update to EU consumer law will require many businesses selling online to offer a simpler, more accessible way for customers to cancel contracts within the standard 14-day cooling-off period.

Continue Reading →

Posted

NewsofNoteMain-300x250

In this week’s News of Note, Amazon continues its competition with Starlink by launching another batch of internet satellites, WhatsApp receives a ban by congressional staffers and “the ChatGPT of quantum computing” launches in Canada. Elsewhere, Texas Instruments announces a major investment in semiconductor production in the United States.

Continue Reading →

Posted

NewsofNote-300x250

In this week’s News of Note, Disney and Universal target alleged copyright infringement, OpenAI and Mattel team up to bring artificial intelligence to toymaking and China launches its production of the world’s first non-binary AI chip. Elsewhere, Nvidia announces its major expansion into Europe with its first industrial AI Cloud.

Continue Reading →

Posted

After years of contractual entanglements, public disputes and strategic reinvention, Taylor Swift has achieved something few global recording artists have: She now owns the master recordings of her entire musical catalog.

Continue Reading →

Posted

qubits-1169873499-300x158Quantum computing (QC) is poised to disrupt cybersecurity in ways that business leaders and legal professionals cannot afford to ignore. But what exactly is quantum computing, why does it pose such a significant threat to encryption, and what should businesses be doing about it today?

Continue Reading →

Posted

After a decade of litigation and a pivotal Supreme Court ruling from 2023, the legal battle between Jack Daniel’s and VIP Products has taken yet another turn, this time back in favor of Jack Daniel’s. On remand from the Supreme Court in the case VIP Products LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc., the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona issued an amended order on January 21, 2025, finding that VIP’s “Bad Spaniels” dog toy is not likely to cause consumer confusion with Jack Daniel’s whiskey brand and trade dress, thereby not constituting trademark infringement.  However, the district court found that it nevertheless dilutes the fame and distinctiveness of the whiskey maker’s reputation, thereby still running afoul of the Lanham Act’s anti-dilution provisions. The amended order follows the Supreme Court’s decision ending the application of the more liberal Rogers First Amendment test in trademark cases involving expressive works used as source identifiers. In doing so, while finding that the parody of the “Bad Spaniels” dog toy decreased the likelihood of confusion with Jack Daniel’s by modifying the analysis of certain factors in a light more favorable to VIP, the district court ultimately found VIP’s parody of the famous whiskey brand to be a double-edged sword that contributed to finding dilution by tarnishment.

Continue Reading →

Posted

Businessperson checking yes or no (green checkmarks or red X's) to unspecified textImagine you’re an associate at a consulting firm. You’re surprised to see a new “AI Assist” button appear in your email application one morning. Without any training or guidance from your firm’s IT department, you decide to try it out, asking the AI to draft a response to a client’s inquiry about tax implications for a proposed merger. The AI confidently generates a response that looks professional and well-written, which you quickly review and send. Three days later, your managing partner calls you into their office—the AI cited outdated tax regulations and recommended a structure that would create significant liability for the client. The incident triggers an urgent internal review, revealing that dozens of employees have been using the undisclosed AI feature for weeks, potentially exposing the firm to professional liability and damaging client relationships.

Continue Reading →

Posted

We recently discussed a number of updates in the world of name, image and likeness (NIL) rights. Among those recent developments was the signing by Georgia Governor Brian Kemp of an executive order that, inter alia, prohibited the NCAA and athletic conferences from taking “adverse action” against Georgia schools for directly compensating their athletes for NIL.

Continue Reading →

Posted

As 2024 comes to a close, permutations in the arena of name, image and likeness (NIL) impacting collegiate athletics continue unabated.

Most prominently, Northern District of California District Judge Claudia Wilken preliminarily approved the proposed settlement agreement to resolve the trio of pending antitrust cases known colloquially as Carter, House, and Hubbard. While a number of judicial hurdles must be cleared before the settlement is finalized and implemented, Judge Wilken’s ruling is a significant step toward a new system of rules and athlete compensation for collegiate athletics.

Continue Reading →