达美乐披萨惹上了打官司，一直打到美国最高法院
The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from Domino’s Pizza Monday after a federal appellate court ruled that a blind customer can sue the chain under the Americans with Disabilities Act after he couldn’t fully use its website through screen-reading software.
美国最高法院周一驳回了达美乐披萨的上诉，此前一家联邦上诉法院裁定，一名盲人顾客可以根据《美国残疾人法》对这一连锁店提起诉讼，因为他无法通过屏幕阅读软件充分利用达美乐披萨的网站。
Domino’s had asked the Supreme Court to rule that the ADA didn’t apply to websites and apps, arguing the 1990 law predated the modern internet and that there were no firm rules businesses could comply with to make their online assets accessible.
达美乐披萨请求最高法院裁定《美国残疾人法》不适用于网站和应用程序，辩称这个1990年的法律早于现代互联网，而且公司没有具体法律可遵守来使消费者能访问其网上信息。
“Each defendant must figure out how to make every image on its website or app sufficiently accessible to the blind, how to render every video or audio file sufficiently available to the deaf, or how to provide content to those who cannot operate a computer or mobile phone,” the pizza chain had argued. “Businesses and nonprofits must maintain that accessibility as their online content constantly changes and grows through links to other content.”
这家披萨连锁店分辨道：“每个被告都必须弄清如何使其网站或应用程序上的图片能被盲人有效利用，如何将每个视频或音频文件充分呈现给聋的人，或者如何为那些不会操作电脑或手机的人提供信息。企业和非营利组织必须保持这种可访问性，因为他们网站上的内容通过与其他内容链接不断变化增长。”
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that since Domino’s is a place of public accommodation, it’s required under the law to provide “auxiliary aids and services” making visual materials accessible to visually impaired customers. The court found that applies to the chain’s website and app, even though they’re often used outside of Domino’s restaurants.
第九巡回上诉法院已做出裁决，既然达美乐披萨为公众服务，就需要依照法律提供“辅助设备及服务”，使视障客户能够使用视觉材料。法院发现这适用于该连锁店的网站和应用程序，即使这些东西人们经常不是在达美乐店内使用的。
The ruling may cause businesses to take website accessibility concerns more seriously.
这一裁决可能会导致企业更加重视网站的可访问性问题。
Screen-reading software users often say modern websites and apps don’t have enough built-in cues to let the software translate what’s happening on-screen to audio output in a meaningful way.
屏幕阅读软件用户经常说，现代网站和应用程序没有足够的内置提示，无法让软件以有意义的方式将屏幕显示的内容转换为音频输出。
But business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had expressed concern that the appeals court ruling, coupled with uncertainty about exactly what it means to make a website accessible, could lead to an onslaught of lawsuits over website access that could even lead some companies to reduce their online presences.
但美国商会等商业团体担心上诉法院的裁决再加上不确定网站可访问性的准确定义，会导致大量关于网站访问的诉讼，甚至还会导致一些公司减少线上服务。
