Harvard, MIT Hit with Webcast Captioning Class Action Lawsuit

Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology have been called out individually in webcast captioning class action lawsuits filed against the universities by the National Association of the Deaf on Feb. 12. Each of the putative class action lawsuits allege the institutions of higher education discriminated against individuals who are deaf and hard-of-hearing by failing to properly caption their open online courses and other web content.

According to the Harvard and MIT webcast captioning class action lawsuits, NAD claims that the well-known, prestigious colleges have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act by denying individuals with hearing problems and deafness  proper access to thousands of free videos and audio tracks.

The ADA and the Rehabilitation Act are federal laws that prevent Harvard, MIT, and other universities from denying individuals with disabilities from their programs and services, including online content like videos and audio materials. This web-exclusive content available through Harvard and MIT’s websites feature campus speeches by famous and influential individuals like President Barack Obama and Bill Gates, as well as self-help seminars, and even semesters of course videos.

The webcast captioning class action lawsuit claims that while Harvard and MIT present this online content as available for free to any person with an internet connection, some videos allegedly do not feature closed captions, thus preventing individuals with hearing impairments and other auditory disabilities from fully accessing the content.

NAD further alleges in these Harvard and MIT class action lawsuits that other videos that do feature closed captions feature inaccurate captions, causing confusion to deaf and hard of hard-of-hearing viewers. For example, in an MIT talk given by President Obama, the video’s closed caption features the President saying, “got down on dollars ok,” when in reality he had stated, “go down on the solar cell.”

A similar allegation was made against Harvard, pointing to the video featuring Lady Gaga’s campus visit, in which a student had said the phrase “on our campus,” which had allegedly been transcribed to “hot Campen good,” in the closed captions. In the Harvard MIT webcast captioning class action lawsuits, NAD claims, “such unintelligible captioning fails to provide equal access or effective communication for individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing.”

The webcast captioning class action lawsuits against Harvard and MIT do not seek monetary damages from the educational institutions. Rather, NAD hopes “that this lawsuit will change not only Harvard’s and MIT’s practices, but set an example for other universities to follow,” according to the webcast captioning complaint.

In response to the webcast captioning class action lawsuits, Harvard has stated, “We look forward to the establishment of those new standards and will, of course, fully comply once they are finalized. Expanding access to knowledge and making online learning content accessible is of vital importance to Harvard and to educational institutions across the country.” An MIT representative stated that the university is “committed to making its educational material accessible to our students and online learners who are deaf and hearing impaired.”

Plaintiffs are represented by Thomas P. Murphy, Christine M. Griffin, Stanley J. Eichner and Richard M. Glassman of Disability Law Center Inc.; Timothy P. Fox and Sarah M. Morris of Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center; Bill Lann Lee and Julie Wilensky of Lewis Feinberg Lee Renaker & Jackson PC; Arlene B. Mayerson and Namita Gupta of Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund; and Caroline E. Jackson and Marc P. Charmatz of the National Association of the Deaf Law and Advocacy Center.

The Harvard and MIT Webcast Captioning Class Action Lawsuits are National Association of the Deaf, et al. v. Harvard University, et al. and National Association of the Deaf, et al. v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Case Nos. 3:15-cv-30023 and 3:15-cv-30024, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Western Division.