Reminded someone that not only did #accessiBe’s overlay not help a site, it may have been a factor in the lawsuit against that site (PDF):
https://archive.org/details/gov.uscourts.pawd.316620

Paragraph 45 also takes a shot at #UserWay and #AudioEye.

Docket:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/56797092/MONTANO_et_al_v_RESTAURANT_EQUIPPERS,_INC

#accessibility #overlays #a11y

Woof. 5 years since I kicked off my “[overlay] Will Get You Sued” series, which helped lead to a million dollar fine earlier this year by the FTC against accessiBe for its constant lies.
https://bsky.app/profile/overlaytimeline.com/post/3lss6jbuwec27

Yes, I’m taking some credit for that.

#accessiBe #overlay #accessibility #a11y

"FTC Approves Final Order Requiring accessiBe to pay $1 Million"

That’s a big news. Overlays are bullshit. WCAG must be implemented in source code, not with that kind of magic tools.

Next, some French companies selling such unefficient tools too?

#a11y #overlays #web #accessiBe

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/04/ftc-approves-final-order-requiring-accessibe-pay-1-million

I also updated my 23,297 word post (which I expect nobody to read and lives on mostly as a testament to accessiBe’s hubris and illegal actions) “#accessiBe Will Get You Sued” (anchor link):
https://adrianroselli.com/2020/06/accessibe-will-get-you-sued.html#FTCApprovesAccessiBeFine

#accessibility #a11y

FTC decision against #accessiBe came down Tuesday and a somewhat snarky FTC blog post yesterday, so I link to both with excerpts:
https://adrianroselli.com/2025/01/ftc-catches-up-to-accessibe.html#Update02

Also included an example of where _maybe_ accessiBe might have already been misbehaving?

#overlay #a11y #accessibility

This is my comment to the commission. I'm a screen reader user myself. I just want to talk about some things from the complaint.
61. “accessiBe is an automated and comprehensive web accessibility solution that achieves
ongoing compliance with ADA and WCAG regulations for your website.”
Ex. N, Sept. 25, 2020 Blog Post on webdesignerdepot.com.
B. accessiBe Tweet Cross-Promoting Webdesigner Depot “Review”
62. accessiBe is “a web accessibility solution for ADA and WCAG compliance.”
Ex. O, Sept. 29, 2020 Tweet.
C. accessiBe Facebook Post Cross-Promoting Webdesigner Depot
“Review”
63. “accessiBe is a web accessibility solution for ADA and WCAG compliance.”Screenshot of an @AccessiBe tweet with the text, "By harnessing the power of #AI and #automation, accessiBe eliminates the choice that business owners face by making #web #accessibility a no-brainer. Here's how>" and a thumbnail graphic link. The thumbnail displays an image of an accessible keyboard and the text: "webdesignerdepot.com," "AccessiBe Review 2020: Solving Web Accessibility with AI" and "acessiBe is a web accessibility solution for ADA and WCAG compliance."18
Ex. P, Sept. 27, 2020 Facebook Post.
64. Although the September 25, 2020, Webdesigner Depot blog post is formatted to appear
as an independent review, Respondents paid $1,900 for the review and approved it prior to its
publication. Webdesigner Depot, one of accessiBe’s advertising partners, had also received
accessWidget on its website, webdesignerdepot.com, and three others, in exchange for additional
advertising in Webdesigner Depot publications and social media.Screenshot displaying an accessiBe Facebook post that includes the text, "Here's how #accessiBe has harnessed the power of #AI and #automation to make thousands of websites immediately accessible>" and a linked image. The image displays an accessible keyboard and the text: "webdesignerdepot.com," "AccessiBe Review 2020: Solving Web Accessibility with AI and Scalability" and "acessiBe is a web accessibility solution for ADA and WCAG compliance."19
65. The September 25, 2020 review initially did not disclose the relationship between
accessiBe and Webdesigner Depot. Only after Webdesigner Depot readers posted negative
comments in response to the review, Webdesigner Depot added, in small, easy-to-miss print at
the end of the lengthy review, that the post “was published in partnership with our web
accessibility partner, accessiBe.”
66. The Webdesigner Depot review was part of an advertising campaign by accessiBe.
67. In addition, Respondents hired a marketing company to generate numerous similar
reviews designed to appear as though they were from independent publications and to
manipulate Google search results so that more positive content appeared, pushing negative
content and user criticisms lower in the list of web search engine results.
Respondents Had Actual Knowledge That Failure to Disclose accessiBe’s Material
Connections With Endorsers Is An Unfair or Deceptive Practice
68. Respondents had actual knowledge that failure to disclose accessiBe’s material
connections with endorsers is an unfair or deceptive practice.
69. As described in Paragraphs 26 and 52 through 67, accessiBe engaged in a campaign to
place third-party articles that appeared to be reviews from impartial and unbiased authors when,
in fact, accessiBe paid for those reviews and, in some instances, reviewed or edited their content
before the reviews were published. In a number of these instances, Respondents’ employees or
other individuals warned Respondents that failing to disclose their material connections in these
reviews was deceptive.

You the commissioners know about all of this, and I'm sure you know about the Tribeca skin center case, in which Accessibee was sued for fair dealing, direct marketing to businesses, and promising them litigation support when they got sued. They failed on the promise, according to Tribeca.
https://is.gd/neXgjc Sorry about the shrotened link, 5000 characters isn't enough. It's a reference to the tribeca complaint. For all of these things, the company should be fined way, way more than a million dollars, that was a pittance! They have defamed everyone in the disabled and blind communities, by telling us we aren't worthy enough to have developers learn about accessibility themselves. An overlay company must do it for them, or we're automatically going to sue them! They have given us a reputation of people who have nothing to do but go around suing companies who don't conform to standards that exist because the W3C voted on them.
I guess my question for the commission, is how do you plan to enforce the prohibitions and disclosure requirements in the order? Unless you have some kind of oversight, don't you think they will continue doing all of these things in the future?