Accessibility: internet websites.

Existing law imposes liability upon a person who denies, aids or incites a denial of, or makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to, rights afforded by law for actual damages suffered, exemplary damages, a civil penalty, and attorney's fees, as specified, to any person who was denied the specified rights. Existing law also imposes liability upon a person, firm, or corporation that denies or interferes with admittance to, or enjoyment of, public facilities or otherwise interferes with the rights of an individual with a disability, as specified, for damages and attorney's fees to a person who was denied those rights. This bill would provide that statutory damages based upon the inaccessibility of an internet website under these provisions shall only be recovered against an entity, as defined, if the internet website fails to provide equally effective communication or facilitate full and equal enjoyment of the entity's goods and services to all members of the public. The bill would make statutory damages for internet website inaccessibility contingent on the plaintiff proving that they had one of 2 sets of experiences. Specifically, the plaintiff may prove that they personally encountered a specific barrier that caused a difference in the plaintiff's access to or use of the internet website as compared to other users, as specified. Alternatively, the plaintiff may prove that they were deterred from accessing all or part of the internet website, as specified, because of the internet website's failure to provide equally effective communication or to facilitate full and equal enjoyment of the entity's goods and services offered to the public. Under the bill, an entity's internet website would be presumed to comply with the above-described accessibility requirements, as specified, if the internet website has a certain certification by a professional reviewer, as defined, that, among other things, the internet website is designed and intended to conform to the internet website-related accessibility standard, as defined. This bill would make it unlawful for a resource service provider, as defined, in exchange for remuneration, to intentionally, negligently, recklessly, or knowingly construct, license, distribute, or maintain for online use an internet website that fails to provide equally effective communication or fails to facilitate full and equal enjoyment of the entity's goods and services to all members of the public, including any member of the public who is a person with a disability. The bill would also make it unlawful for a resource provider to intentionally, negligently, knowingly, or recklessly make certain false representations, including that the resource provider is a professional reviewer or otherwise qualified to assess the accessibility of an internet website. The bill would authorize a civil action, with specified remedies, by a person or entity that pays, compensates, or contracts with a resource service provider to construct, license, distribute, or maintain an internet website that complies with the above-described accessibility requirements, as specified. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General, the Civil Rights Department, or a district attorney, county counsel, or city attorney to bring an action to obtain injunctive or declaratory relief and attorney's fees and costs. The bill would provide that a provision within a contract between a person or entity and a resource service provider that seeks to waive liability under these provisions, or otherwise shift liability to a person or entity that pays, compensates, or contracts with the resource provider, as provided, is void as a matter of public policy and subject to specified provisions of the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976 relating to waiver of rights. Existing law enacts specified provisions requiring an attorney, with each demand letter or complaint alleging an internet website-related disability claim, to provide the defendant with a copy of a written advisory notice pertaining to disability access. Existing law makes those provisions operative only if AB 1757 of the 2023–24 Regular Session is enacted and goes into effect on or before January 1, 2025. This bill would instead make those provisions operative on January 1, 2025.