Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:25:00 EDT
From:         Tzipporah Ben Avraham <ZIPPY@BKLYN.BITNET>
Subject:      disability tech law paper

DisABILITY Computing and the Law: What You Should Know
by Tzipporah Benavraham

	Accessibility has many faces facets and aspects. And access
for a person with a major life impairment (disability) is a matter
of legal definition and resolve. The miracle of access to the printed
word has been revolutionized for disabled people through the
use of the computer. Miracles never though possible are occurring
daily in elementary and secondary schools, as well as in
colleges and businesses. To watch a quadraplegic input computer
data by use of an eyeblink switch inspires and brings an enigmatic
smile to us. To see a blind person read braille just output from
a computer also poises our mind to wonderment. To see a deaf
person use a telephone with a TDD (Telecommunications Device for
the Deaf) brings dignity of self-determination to a population
we would never have thought could communicate so freely before.
All this would have been science fiction a few short years ago.
Yet today the wonders of technology are enabling many to
enabling positions of independence.

	However, as in all tangible things, law and regulation
has indeed found its nitch in this amazing world of computer
miracles. And with the rule of law comes the perameters of
access, affordability and use. Many laws and responibilities
have come forth from this remarkable technological development
called the adaptive computer. I wish to guide you around the key
points of this human interface to technology and disabled.

LAWS REGULATIONS COURT DECISIONS AND DISABILITY TECH

	Most people think of laws as scarey things that pin
striped suited lawyers argue about in ornate halls of justice.
However through law comes the greatest possibilities for
technology access for disabled persons. Here are a few key
laws:

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: 42 U.S.C. Sections
12101 et seq.
	
	This is called the most significant piece of legislation
concerning disabled persons ever in the history of the world.
This 102 page law contains elements concerning employment, housing,
public accomodation, and telecommunications.  Regulations and
the public hearing processes will continue to 1992. In there
are many issues concerning disabled and what is called "reasonable
accomodation". That phrase is infused in many laws concerning
disabled persons. Among the technologies of modern time are
adaptive computer terminals for disability access. This would
cover the broadest spectrum. Employers may have to place
disability work stations in businesses where disabled will work.
Or TDDs may be required for deaf to have access to the phone lines
for simplistic communication. Public accomodation will include
the spectrum of libraries having talking terminals for the
print disabled for access to their computerized technology.
In that also will be public buildings of all kinds such as
resturants, hotels, train plane and rail stations, and an
array of public service and commercial establishments. In all
places a computer is placed, access for the disabled may indeed
become an actionable issue if there is no accomodation under
this law. Thus an airline with a computer terminal for information
for their passengers may indeed be required to provide voice
synthesis access for blind persons. Or a hotel may be required
to have a TDD for a hearing impaired person to use. And
the net effect may well be lower cost as more people are
mandated to use this law in the future. However, since most
of these laws will not be in regulatory form until 1992,
they are not clearly established YET.

Technology Act for the Disabled; Public law 100-407
29 USC 2201, 2202 et seq.

	This law establishes sites of technology access for disabled
persons. The theory is that the technology is quite expensive at
present. Yet if more people (the rationale states) with disability
had access to "try out" and "train" in these devices, more disabled
persons would take advantage of the technology. In this plan
many centers are funded nationwide. Every state has established
a "tech act" co-ordinator. In New York State, as an example,
the New York State Office of Advocate for the Disabled has been
so designated as the liason. In New York State they are at
518 474 5567 and the co-ordinator is Deborah Buck. However
EVERY state has one designated agency and person to deal with
this funding and plan. Seek out your own state's plan and
director for more concrete information on this.

International Meeting of Experts on Human Resources
in the Field of Disability: Tallin Estonia SSR,
14-22 1989

	A spectactular meeting was held on International
implications of disability and technology use on that
date by the United Nations Disabled Persons Unit. A
rich pamphlet was produced quantifying technology use and
law on the international plane in a document. The
name of this paragraph is the name of the document. You
may get a copy of it by writing to the Disabled Persons
Unit; United Nations Centre for Social Development and
Humanitarian Affairs; PO Box 500 A-1400; Vienna Austria.
In this unique world document, you will find issues concerning
disabled children and telecommunications education, the use of
disability technology in the workplace, how to train
teachers to develop such resources, and an array of
codified instructions to governments on how to accomplish
this task.  In international law, the rules and
guidelines can only look like "recommendations" as there
are scarce resources to force or police a nation to compliance.
Hence upon reading these do not appear as laws to the
otherwise uninitiated.  Indeed they are and this document
presents a wealth of ideas and stipulations.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-112 as amended
29 U.S.C. section 702 et seq.

	The famous "504 law" appears in this section of
law. 504 is "non discrimination on the basis of disability
in federally assisted programs". Before the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990, this 1973 law as amended
was the civil rights provision for disabled persons.
It only allowed what was called "reasonable accomodation"
in those programs for disabled persons that received
Federal money. Until present time a disabled person who
needed an adapted computer to WORK could not use this law.
However the raminifations were clear oin 504 issues to
colleges and schools of education so funded by the government.

	In this act also is the definition of a disabled person.
For the intents of clarifying "who is a disabled person"
I include this definition:

     In the Federal Register, Volume 45 number 92 Friday May
9, 1980, page 30937, the Department of Education made regulations
about disabled persons in education. Originally this was the
a rule making for the education department alone. However, it
has become a universal referance as to who or what a disabled
person is for the federal governments' purposes. I will interject
the verbatim listing of the definition.

     Section 104.3 part j states "Handicapped person."
(1) "Handicapped persons" means any person who (i) has a
physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one
or more major life activities.(ii) has a record of such an
impairment.(iii) is regarded as having such an impairment.
  (2) As used in paragraph (j)(1) of this section, the
phrase:
   (i) "Physical or mental impairment" means (A) any
physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement,
or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following
body systems: neurological; musculoskeletal; special sense
organs; respiratory, including speech organs; cardiovasular;
reproductive; digestive; genito-urinary; hematic and lymphatic;
skin and endocrine; or (B) any mental or psychological disorder
such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional
or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities.
   (ii) Major life activities means functions such as caring
for oneself, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing,
hearing, breathing, learning and working.

      In this context, we have a medical model definition
of what handicap is. In effect, those persons with those
impairments are a 'protected class', who require certain
adaptation to be equal in society.

	As you see, many common ordinary people you know are
"handicapped" under this definition. 504 gave the shape
quantity and format to the issues.

Section 508: Electronic Data Processing for Disabled Federal
Employees of Public Law 99-506 as amended

	This was the start of another array of laws concerning
disabled persons and technology. Here is the full text of the
law:

FULL TEXT OF SECTION 508 OF PUBLIC LAW 99:506

Electronic Equipment Accessibility

Section 508. (a) (1) The Secratary, through the director of the
National Institute on Disability and Rehabiliation Research an the
Administrator of General Services, and in consultation with the
electronics industry, shall develop and establish guidelines for
electronic equipment accessibility designed to insure that individuals
with handicaps may use electronic office equipment with or without
special peripherals.

(2) The guidelines established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be
applicable with respect to electronic equipment, whether purchased
or leased.

(3) The initial guidelines shall be established not later than
October 1, 1987 and shall be periodically revised by the director of
the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
and the Administrator of General Services in consultation with the
electronics industry and the Interagency Committee for Computer
Support of Handicapped employees as technologies advance or change.

	(b) Beginning after September 30, 1988, the Administrator
of General Services shall adopt guidelines for electronic equipment
accessibility under subsection (a) for Federal procurement of
electronic equipment. Each agency shall comply with the guidelines
adopted under this subsection.

	(c) For the purposes of this section, the term, "special
peripherals" means the specific needs aid that provides access to
electronic equipment that is otherwise inaccessible to an
individual with handicaps.

	In this simple law these 1591 characters started the
revolution in disability technology policy. To dovetail this,
the Public Law 99-506 and is sections is the amended form of
the Rehab Act of 1973. In this we see the progression of policy
as the rights of disabled procede.

	A rather remarkable policy document called the
"COCA Bullitens" has been written concerning this.
The regulations called the FIRMR bullitens quantify the
rules of this law. You may get copies of this. Here is a
quoted citation from the manual:


  Managing End User Computing for Users with Disabilities has
been prepared by the Clearinghouse on Computer Accommodation
(COCA) of the Information Resources Management Service (IRMS),
General Services Administration (GSA). This handbook presents
guidance to Federal managers and other personnel who are
unfamiliar with the application of computer and related
information technology to accommodate users with disabilities
and provide for their effective access to information
resources.  Issues reviewed represent "lessons learned" by
agencies and GSA's Clearinghouse On Computer Accommodation.

The unbound format of this handbook accommodates the need
for periodic updating due to the rapid introduction of new
accommodation-related products and services and the evolving
nature of the guidance presented.  Updates will be available
on-line and hard-copy and can be obtained by completing the
registration form

(appendix A).

COCA staff invite comments and contributions to the guide.
In addition, COCA can be contacted to arrange demonstrations
of accommodation solutions at their technical resource center.
COCA is also available to assist managers with technical
advice and assistance during acquisition planning.

The COCA staff may be reached on 202-523-1906 voice/TDD
(FTS 523-1906) or via mail at GSA, Susan A. Brummel,
Director, Clearinghouse on Computer Accommodation, Room
2022, KGDO, 18th & F Streets, N.W., Washington, DC 20405.

 COCA offers a training class for managers entitled
"Managing Computer Accommodation for Users with
Disabilities".  In addition, COCA also offers informal
introductory consultation/training at its technical
resource center at the GSA building, 18th and F Sts. N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20405.  Consultations can be scheduled by
calling (FTS or 202) 523-1906.

Appropriate documentation is an important part of training.
Whenever possible, documentation should be made available
to the user in the most useful manner, whether this be
braille, audio tape, large print, captioned tapes or
electronic media.  For example, a printed manual on a
database package is virtually useless to a blind user.
If documentation in a special form is required, management
should take steps to secure such documentation after
determining the accommodation requirements.
((end of quote from COCA documentation))

	We see from this that technology assistance is
well defined with the law and regulations. No base has
been left uncovered. Thus the ever expanded laws and
rules of disability and technology surfaces and
remains intact. We see the massive building blocks of
law and service which are the benchmarks and foundations
of access technology.

Education of All Handicapped Children Act Public Law
94-142 as amended. 20 USC Sec 1400 et seq.

	This law is soon to be named the "Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act" (IDEAS) by Congress on its
re-enactment.  Children with disabilities also are afforded
"reasonable accomodation" in their education. However another
phrase called "related services" has appeared in the laws
for children with disabilities. In 20 USCA Section 1401 (18)
"approprriate education" for a disabled child is defined as
providing "special education and related services".  A rather
significant court ruling came from a child named "Tatro"
who needed a "related service" of a catheterization to attend
a mainstreamed school. In the case before the Supreme Court
of the United States, "Tatro v. State of Texas, 703
F.2d 823 (5 Cir. 1983"  The bottom line was the Supreme
Court decided an array of services are indeed "related"
IF IT ENABLES THE CHILD TO CONTINUE IN SCHOOL IN THE
LEAST RESTRICTIVE MOST APPRORPRIATE ENVIRONMENT. Thus
catheterization was indeed given in her "free and
approprriate public education". From this interface
and decision an array of "related services" are contracted
for including use of and instruction of adaptive technology.
In New York City Board of Education as an example, Dr
Stephen Hittman runs the Office of Contracted and Related
Services. He runs a program by which disabled children and
their schools can "contract" for "related services"
for their needs. This came to be because of the Tatro
decision. Dr Hitmman's Office at the New York City Board
of Education is at 111 Livingston Street, Brooklyn NY
Room 444. (718 935 3581) Perhaps your own area includes
such an office.

	Disabled children have also been afforded such
devices as "augmentative speech" devices and "hearing aid
loops" in what is called their "individual education program".
That becomes a "legal and binding contract" for services
for each child. In New York State, an array of technology
assistance centers called SETRCs (Special Education Training
and Resource Centers) have been established. Many of the
expensive technological devices used by disabled children
have been recycled in these centers. One such SETRC is the
Batavia School for the Blind of Richmond Avenue, Batavia NY,
14020. (716 343-5384) Here they recycle such things as
computers voice synthesizers and braillers and an array of
disability technology relating to blindness and vision
impairment for children. A similar SETRC is at the Rome
School for the Deaf. (315) 337 8400 (401 Turin St. Rome NY)

State Run Schools for Handicapped Children Public Law 89-313

	Previous to Public Law 94 142, this law funded
schools for disabled children. They were to be run by the
State Education Department and were mostly sequestured
schools. Many schools such as the above Batavia School
for the Blind and Rome School for the Deaf were established
and were "disability specific" under this law. However,
since mainstreaming was mandated and funded by Public Law
94 142 as amended, many of these schools have taken on a new
face and purpose. Many now provide centralized points
of  training and technology for that specific disability.
Look in your area for similar schools. Many of them may even
contract to provide technology training for the specific
disability and child you are seeking to assist.

	You may find resources you are amazed at. For deaf
 children and adults, the Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitation Services of the Federal government funds
a project called "Captioning of Films for the Deaf". There
are two places specifically funded to produce captioned
educational films for deaf persons. Here are their addresses:

National Captioning Institute Inc.
5203 Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA  22041
(703) 998-2400

Provides closed captioning service for television
networks, program producers, cablecasters, producers of
home entertainment video cassettes, advertisers and other
organizations in the federal and private sectors.

Also the second place is:

Modern Talking Picture Service is a captioned film/video
program made available by the U.S. Department of Education.
It makes available feature films and a range of educational
films and videos.  Users of theatrical films/videos should
have a general audience setting that contains at least six
deaf or hard of hearing persons.  Users of educational titles
should have a class or educational setting that contains at
least one deaf or hearing impaired person.  There are 3,561
educational and theatrical titles in this free-loan captioned
program. Contact Modern Talking Picture Service, 5000 Park
Street N, St. Petersburg, FL 33709, (800)237-6213.*

((* My thanks to Mr Chuck Lynd of LINC Resources Inc
at 1 800 772 7372 for this captioning information))

	The US Department of Education, Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services funds many services
dealing with technology and the needs of the disabled.
The specialized money to produce these captioned films
is defined in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
which you can find at any US Government bookstore. Many
of these films are now captioned by use of specialized
computer technology. An impressive array of these devices
can be found at the Rochester Technical Institute for the
Deaf in Rochester New York. Much software is available
at present to help your common personal computer assist
with captioning of any film. Hence again disability and
computers take on a facinating interface.

SOME COURT CASES OF NOTE

	Several court cases also quantify the fact that
persons with disabilities also have access to technology
as a civil right. Here are some cases of particular
note.

	Children are particually of interest to the US Supreme
Court and an array of Federal courts. Many cases justify the
right of a disabled child to education with RELATED SERVICES
in the least restrictive environment. These are most noteworthy:

Board of Education V Rowley , 458 US at n.4; (on related services
of an FM  loop for a hearing impaired child to mainstream)

AW v. Northwest R-1 School District, 813 F.2d 158
162-163 (8th Circuit), cert denied, 56 USLW. 3244 (1987)

Rockner v Walter, 700 F.2d 1058, 1063 (6TH Cir) cert denied,
464 US 864 (1983)

Springdale School District  #50 vs Grace, 693 F2d.
41, 43 (8th Cir.) vert denied, 461 US 927 (1983)

Most noteworthy is Rowley. In the text of the Supreme
Court decision, the decision states:

(the educational service must) " to the maximum extent
appropriate, handicapped children... are to be educated
with children who are not handicapped, and that removal
of handicapped children from regular educational environment
[should occur] only when the nature of the severity of the
handicap is such that education in a regular class
WITH THE USE OF SUPPLEMENTARY AIDS AND SERVICES cannot
be achieved satisfactorily."

In this, the Rowley decision, we find mainstreaming
WITH RELATED AIDS AND SERVICES (such as the FM loop
for the child) is indeed in keeping with Public Law
94-142's intent. So children can and do receive an
array of technology for their disabilities in the
course of their education. The above mentioned
accomodation for the captioning of films for the
deaf is a clear example of this. It is clear that
if a child in a regular class has any use of technology
in the educational persuits of the class, the disabled
child should have adaptions for their disability as
well so they can participate equally. Hence we see
Rowley firmy establishes technology access for
disabled children.

In regards to bilingual education and technology
for disabled persons, we find two noteworthy class
action suits. One is the Jose P case. The cite is
Jose P vs Aumbach and the NYS Board of Education
and NYC Board of Education. 557 Fed Supp. 1230 et seq.
In this a Spanish speaking disabled child sought related
services for his disability in the school system. This
suit is ongoing to this day. In this an array of
special accomodations have been enforced and mandated through
what is called a "writ of mandamus". Spanish speaking disabled
children as an example are learning Spanish word processing
if they are orthopedically impaired by using Dr Steven
Hittman's Office of Contracted and Related Services to fullfil
the need. Several vendors of training and Spanish speaking
technology have adapted lessons for these children and are
"contracted with"  for these educational services.

Also the Lora consent decree concerning bi-lingual,
bi-cultural special education services. This is found
in 456 Fed Supp 1211 et seq. Under this decision and
consent decree a blind from birth child received Hebrew
computer braille training at Brooklyn College under
my tutalage. This was quantified in her IEP and placed
in force by NYS Family Court as her IEP for related
services. The stipulation decreed that this was a "free
appropriate education with related services based on the
Lora decreee and the Jose P case decrees." Hence
this very specialized educational service is provided by
court ruling.

In higher education,  we come across the  case
United States v University of Alabama
CA No 86-C1779-S, N.D. 12/30/88, slip op. at 7, 26-27.
This case dealt with the University holding a scrutiny
on the disabled that they be made eligible for financial
aid to be eligible for  auxillary aids. The decision stated
that in 34 CFR section 1044.44(d) the recipients of
Federal funding are required to ensure that students
with disabilities are provided auxillary aids, including
taped texts, interperters for students with hearing
impairment, readers for students with visual impairment
classroom equipment adapted for use by students with
manual impairments and other similar services and actions.
This should be only if the assistive device would not
fundamentally alter or substantially modify the character
of the program. Hence if all the class must learn
statistics on a computer as an example, and a student
requires a voice synthesis device to perceive the screen
independently, the college is obligated to provide the
device free of charge to the student. It is actionable
offense under US Civil Rights law otherwise.

In the arena of employment, the issues of "reasonable
accomodation" for the disability also occurs. In recognition
of the fact that certain "accomodations" are needed for
a person with a disability to be employed. Noteworthy
is Gardner V Morris 752 F2nd 1271 (8th Cir. 1985) which
said a "reasonable accomodation" should not be oppressive to
the employer, however referred to 28 CFR Sections 41.53,
42.513(c) for a clearer definition of the meaning of
"oppressive". The CFR reference is in relation to
disabled FEDERAL employees and what is considered a
reasonable accomodation. However, the Americans with
Disabilities Act now defines the accomodations of this
section of Federal law as integral to the enforcement of the
employment section in ADA. It is NOT considered "opressive"
for the telephone company as an example to provide a
versabraille (TM) on the computer teminal to a blind telephone
information operator who requires one for the functioning of
the job. The numbers of the employees in the company, the nature
and cost of the particular accomodation, and the nature and size
of the employers business. Based on these specific decisions
of the court, we have the guideline for businesses.

MISCELLENEOUS PROVISIONS OF LAW RELATING TO TECHNOLOGY
AND THE DISABLED:

	In 1984, I was quite instrumental in the formulation
of the computer funding formula for disabled children in
New York State. In Title 8 NYCRR Section 175.25 we find
line 8 which states all disabled children in NYS should have
$17.25 per child for computer hardware and $5.25 for
software per semester provided for their needs. This is the
exact formula as non disabled children in the state. I
would deem this an important provision for disability
computer policy persons to consider in their lobbying of
their legislators. The exact same formula for non-disabled
children for access to computer technology should be the
same. This law is a model.

	The National Library Service for the Blind and
Physically Handicapped also provides free tape recorded
and brailled text books to qualified persons. However,
most people are not aware that in 1969, the physically
handicapped who could not turn pages were also allowed in
the program. However, the free tape player, record player
and earphones are also available free to schools and
institutions upon proper certification. The address for
further query on this is "National Library Service for
the Blind and Physically Handicapped; Library of Congress;
Washington DC 20542. If your institution, school or
place of public accomodation has print disabled persons
utilizing your facility you MAY be eligible to obtain
not only this technology but also tape recorded materials
for the blind free of charge.

	In pace with the Technology Act for the Disabled,
the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services
has given Recording for the Blind a grant to produce
computer diskette books for the blind and print disabled.
Yoy may make query of this publicly funded service by
writing to Recording for the Blind; 20 Roszel Road,
Princeton NJ. This would make the project a federally funded
project subject to the stipulations of section 504 of
Public Law 93-112.

	The New York State Science and Technology Foundation
is funded by the New York State Office of Economic Development.
They provide grants to commerial developpers of disability
technology on an application basis.

	Many disabled persons are eligible to receive technology
free by evaluation from their local Office of Vocational
Rehabilitation. Call your local Vocational Rehabilitation
Center for rules and stipulations by which you or a disabled
person you know can be funded for vocational rehabilitation
services which COULD include the training of technology
and the agency purchasing same. There is an array of different
procedures for this service. Often such services are provided
as a stipulation of Title 5 of Public Law 93-112, aid to
states to provide services for ADULT disabled persons.

	In the law also there is a provision of providing
various services INCLUDING TECHNOLOGY to elderly blind person.
Here is the law:

	
TITLE VII--COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING

PART C--Independent Living Services for Older Blind Individuals.


SEC. 721. SERVICE PROGRAM ESTABLISHED

(a) The Commissioner may make grants to any designated State
unit  to  provide  independent living services to older blind
individuals.   Such services  shall be  designed  to  assist
an older blind individual to adjust to  blindness  by
becoming more able to care for individual needs.  Such services
may include--

   (1) services to help correct blindness such as

      (A) outreach services,

      (B) visual screening,

      (C) surgical  or therapeutic treatment to prevent,
      correct,  or  modify disabling eye conditions, and

      (D) hospitalization related to such services;

   (2) the provision of eyeglasses and OTHER VISUAL AIDS;

   (3) the  provision  of  services and equipment to  assist
   an  older  blind individual to become more mobile and more
     self-sufficient;

   (4) mobility  training,    Braille  instruction,  and  other
   SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT to help an older blind individual
   adjust to blindness;

   (5) guide services, reader services, and transportation; and

   (6) any  other  appropriate  services designed to assist a
    blind person  in coping  with  daily living activities,
    including  supportive  services  or rehabilitation teaching
    services.

(b) No  grant may  be made under this section unless an
application  therefor, containing  such  information  as
the  Commissioner  may  require,  has  been submitted  to
and approved by the Commissioner.   The  Commissioner  may
not approve any application for a grant unless the application
contains assurances that  the  designated State unit will
seek to incorporate any new methods  and approaches relating
to the services described in subsection (a) into its State
plan for independent living services under section 705 of
this title.

(c) Funds received under this section by any designated
State unit may be used to make grants to public or private
nonprofit agencies or organizations to--

   (1) conduct  activities  which will  improve or expand
   services  for  older  blind individuals and help improve
   public understanding of the problems  of such individuals;
   and

   (2) provide  independent  living services  to older  blind
   individuals  in accordance with the provisions of
    subsection (a).

(d) For purposes of this section,  the term "older blind
individual" means  an individual  aged  fifty-five  or
older whose severe  visual  impairment  makes gainful
employment  extremely  difficult to attain but for  whom
independent living goals are feasible.

	From this we can discern that older blind persons
may apply for rehabilitation services and RELATED DEVICES
AND SERVICES (including computer technology) for their
disabilty as well.

CONCLUSION

	Laws have enabled the use of technology by disabled
persons in many ways. As the enablements become greater
and as technology progresses, we may see yet more laws
and regulations. In brief, adaptive technology has enabled
disabled persons for many years. It continues to do so
in an array of ways. Law both quantifies and also stipulates
the use of technology by disabled persons. The singular
proof and affirmation this will continue is the progression
of past laws carried to present time. It is obvious that
an array of thoughtful laws and judicial decisions have made
this tech available in great quantity. The proliferation
of these highly enabling machines will continue.

	It is my hopes this has provided a valuable and
useful guide. Please refer any questions to me at Project
Easi if you should have any questions.

Tzipporah Benavraham, PhD
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU