Some quotes from the non-html (and thus a pain in the arse to access!) report:
"Organisations that offer goods and services on the Web already have a legal duty to make their sites accessible. It is clear from the investigation that these duties are not being fulfilled. The Commission?s policy is to seek improvement in the first instance through advice and conciliation, and this report contains a range of recommendations to help website owners and developers tackle the barriers to inclusive design. However, where the response is inadequate, we shall be vigorous in the use of our enforcement powers; these range from ?named-party? Formal Investigations which can lead to sanctions against the owners of inaccessible websites, to the provision of support for test cases being brought by individual disabled people."
"Disabled people must frequently overcome additional obstacles before they can enjoy the full range of information, services, entertainment and social interaction offered by the Web:
blind people need sites to provide, for example, text as an alternative to images for translation into audible or legible words by specially designed screenreading devices; partially sighted people may be especially reliant upon large-format text and effective colour contrast; people who are dyslexic or have cognitive impairments may benefit in particular from the use of simpler English or alternative text formats, such as Easy Read, and from the clear and logical layout of an uncluttered website; people whose first language is British Sign Language may also find Plain English indispensable; and people with manual dexterity impairments may need to navigate with a keyboard rather than with a mouse."
So as long as you've got your ALT tags set up with adequate descriptions of the images, you're okay?
"On 28 March 2003, the Disability Rights Commission (DRC) announced its first Formal Investigation, into website accessibility for disabled people (see Appendix 1 for the DRC?s statutory remit and for the terms of reference of this investigation).
The investigation was confined to publicly accessible sites, to which Part 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) applies. "
So are memebship only sites exempt?
"In Great Britain, Part 3 of the DDA requires providers of goods, facilities and services to avoid the less favourable treatment of disabled people and also to make reasonable adjustments, including the provision of auxiliary aids and services, to any practices, policies or procedures which make it unreasonably difficult for disabled people to make use of the services they provide. Insofar as a website in itself constitutes a service, or is the primary medium for the delivery of a service, it will therefore be covered by Part 3 of the Act."
Perhaps not.
"Internationally, the Australian case of Maguire v The Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games found that the Committee had been in breach of the Australian Disability Discrimination Act 1992 by failing to provide a website to which Mr Maguire could have access."
Not just UK sites then.
Full reports are here:
RTF format
PDF format