Arclight Digital Uses Advanced ADA Website Compliance Solution to Safeguard Businesses
According to industry data, 98% of websites are not fully accessible, leaving businesses vulnerable to legal action under ADA Title III. Arclight Digital's compliance solution integrates seamlessly into existing websites, providing real-time accessibility improvements without requiring extensive manual adjustments.
Proactive Compliance for Legal Protection
In recent years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has reinforced website accessibility requirements, emphasizing that businesses must ensure their online platforms are accessible to individuals with disabilities. Legal cases, such as Erkan v. David A. Hidalgo, M.D., P.C., have demonstrated that implementing ADA compliance solutions can help businesses mitigate legal risks.
'Web accessibility is no longer optional—it's a legal and ethical responsibility,' said Scott Kindred, President of Arclight Digital. 'Our solution allows businesses to take proactive steps to achieve compliance, enhancing usability for all visitors while reducing exposure to lawsuits.'
Key Features of Arclight Digital's ADA Compliance Solution
Potential Tax Benefits for Businesses
In addition to ensuring compliance, businesses may qualify for ADA website compliance tax credits under Section 44 of the IRS Code. This provides an opportunity for eligible companies to offset costs associated with accessibility improvements.
Addressing the Growing Need for Digital Accessibility
With 20% of the population experiencing some form of disability, inclusive web design has become a critical component of online business success. Arclight Digital's solution not only helps companies comply with legal requirements but also enhances the user experience for millions of individuals who rely on accessible websites.
Learn More About Website ADA Compliance
For businesses seeking to improve website accessibility and reduce legal risks, visit Arclight Digital to explore the compliance solution.
Arclight Digital is a Las Vegas-based technology company specializing in digital accessibility solutions. By leveraging AI-powered technology, the company provides businesses with effective tools to achieve ADA and WCAG compliance, ensuring websites are accessible to all users.
Media Contact
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Wire
26 minutes ago
- Business Wire
Deadline Alert: SelectQuote, Inc. (SLQT) Investors Who Lost Money Urged To Contact Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP About Securities Fraud Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP reminds investors of the upcoming deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired SelectQuote, Inc. ('SelectQuote' or the 'Company') (NYSE: SLQT) securities between September 9, 2020 and May 1, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR SELECTQUOTE INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS. What Happened? On May 1, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice ('DOJ') filed a False Claims Act complaint against SelectQuote, alleging, '[f]rom 2016 through at least 2021' SelectQuote received 'tens of millions of dollars' in 'illegal kickbacks' from health insurance companies in exchange for steering Medicare beneficiaries to enroll in the insurers' plans. Further, SelectQuote, in exchange for kickbacks, engaged in a conspiracy with major insurers to illegally discriminate against beneficiaries deemed to be less profitable, including those with disabilities. The DOJ concluded that SelectQuote made materially false claims by stating it offers 'unbiased coverage comparisons' when in fact it 'repeatedly directed Medicare beneficiaries to the plans offered by insurers that paid them the most money, regardless of the quality or suitability of the insurers' plans.' On this news, SelectQuote's stock price fell $0.61, or 19.2%, to close at $2.56 per share on May 1, 2025, on unusually heavy trading volume. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company was directing Medicare beneficiaries to the plans offered by insurers that best compensated SelectQuote, regardless of the quality or suitability of the insurers' plans; (2) that SelectQuote did not provide unbiased comparison shopping for Medicare Advantage insurance plans; (3) that SelectQuote received illegal kickbacks to steer Medicare beneficiaries to certain insurers and limit enrollment in competitors' plans; (4) that as a result, SelectQuote had not complied with applicable laws, regulations, and contractual provisions; (5) that SelectQuote was vulnerable to regulatory and legal sanctions as a result of its conduct, including claims that it had violated the False Claims Act; and (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. If you purchased or otherwise acquired SelectQuote securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than October 10, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Business Wire
3 hours ago
- Business Wire
BigBear.ai and Smiths Detection Complete Testing and Integration
MCLEAN, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- (NYSE: BBAI), a leader in mission-ready AI for national security, today announced the successful integration of its Pangiam ® Threat Detection solution with Smiths Detection's HI-SCAN 6040 CTiX computed tomography screening systems. This integration – now available for airports worldwide – delivers real-time detection of prohibited items in luggage, enhancing security operations across aviation, port, and border environments. The integrated solution completed testing and is being trialed at multiple international airports, providing airport operators with a powerful, flexible tool to modernize checkpoint security. 'Our ability to interoperate with Smiths Detection equipment brings together best-in-class technologies to accelerate threat detection and streamline screening workflows,' said Kevin McAleenan, CEO of 'By connecting platform with Smiths Detection's advanced CT scanners, we're helping airports adopt open architecture solutions that adapt quickly to emerging threats, while also improving throughput and the passenger experience.' The interoperability between both companies' technology marks the latest step in expanding open architecture solutions within aviation security, giving operators more flexibility to select capabilities for their unique operational needs. 'This deepened collaboration demonstrates our shared commitment to delivering smarter, open, and interoperable security solutions, aligning with the principles of the Ada initiative,' said Cymoril Metivier, Global Director Digital, Smiths Detection. 'Combining and validating interoperability between the clarity of Smiths Detection CT imaging with AI analytics and algorithms is an important step forward in supporting our customers in executing Open Architecture responsibly.' Pangiam ® Threat Detection platform was originally developed under the 'Project Dartmouth' initiative and features an open architecture that supports integration with a range of third-party scanning hardware, detection algorithms, and decision support tools. Its flexible design positions airport operators and federal security partners to rapidly evolve alongside today's complex threat environment. To learn more about computer vision and screening products, visit: To learn more about Smiths Detection's aviation security technologies, visit: About is a leading provider of mission-ready AI solutions and services for defense, national security, and critical infrastructure. Customers and partners rely on artificial intelligence and predictive analytics capabilities in highly complex, distributed, mission-based operating environments. Headquartered in McLean, Virginia, is a public company traded on the NYSE under the symbol BBAI. For more information, visit and follow on LinkedIn: @ and X: @BigBearai. To receive email communications from register here. About Smiths Detection Smiths Detection, a business of Smiths Group, is a global leader in inspection and detection technologies for the air transport, ports and borders, armed forces and urban security markets. With more than 70 years of experience in the field, we offer the necessary solutions to protect society from the threats posed by explosives, prohibited weapons, contraband, toxic chemical agents, biological threats and narcotics – helping to make the world a safer place. Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains 'forward-looking statements.' Such statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the intended use of proceeds from the private placement and may be preceded by the words 'intends,' 'may,' 'will,' 'plans,' 'expects,' 'anticipates,' 'projects,' 'predicts,' 'estimates,' 'aims,' 'believes,' 'hopes,' 'potential' or similar words. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, are based on certain assumptions and are subject to various known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's control, and cannot be predicted or quantified and consequently, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including changes in domestic and foreign business, market, financial, political, and legal conditions; risks related to the uncertainty of the projected financial information (including on a segment reporting basis); risks related to delays caused by factors outside of our control, including changes in fiscal or contracting policies or decreases in available government funding; changes in government programs or applicable requirements; budgetary constraints, including automatic reductions as a result of 'sequestration' or similar measures and constraints imposed by any lapses in appropriations for the federal government or certain of its departments and agencies; influence by, or competition from, third parties with respect to pending, new, or existing contracts with government customers; our ability to successfully compete for and receive task orders and generate revenue under Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts; potential delays or changes in the government appropriations or procurement processes, including as a result of events such as war, incidents of terrorism, natural disasters, and public health concerns or epidemics; and increased or unexpected costs or unanticipated delays caused by other factors outside of our control, such as performance failures of our subcontractors; risks related to the rollout of the business and the timing of expected business milestones; the effects of competition on our future business; our ability to issue equity or equity-linked securities in the future, and those factors discussed in the Company's reports and other documents filed with the SEC, including under the heading 'Risk Factors.' More detailed information about the Company and the risk factors that may affect the realization of forward-looking statements is set forth in the Company's filings with the SEC, including the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K and its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. Investors and security holders are urged to read these documents free of charge on the SEC's web site at The Company assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise its forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
Charter-Cox Merger Review And The Rule Of Law
Charter Communications and Cox Communications, two broadband and cable providers, are seeking merger approval from the Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission. Biden antitrust enforcers — which often relied on static market share snapshots to pursue antitrust claims, failing to consider broader market dynamics — might have sued to block this deal, only to be later overruled by the courts, which was a common occurrence during the Biden Administration. However, with the Trump administration restoring traditional antitrust norms grounded in law, precedent, and full-market analysis, the Charter-Cox deal should have a clear path forward. Why Specifics Matter Charter and Cox operate broadband services in largely distinct territories. Charter serves 41 states, focusing mainly on suburban and urban markets, while Cox's footprint is largely concentrated in areas that Charter hardly services, such as Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, and the City of Las Vegas. This geographic separation indicates the merger will not eliminate direct competition. Moreover, today, broadband competition extends well beyond cable providers. Fixed wireless, fiber entrants, and 5G networks have significantly diversified consumer choice. As for cable, an outsized number of American families have ceased paying for it. There were 68.7 million cable TV subscribers in 2024, compared to 98.7 million in 2016. Add it all up, and it becomes clear that the scale created by this merger will strengthen the combined company's ability to innovate and compete against streaming platforms and wireless alternatives rapidly reshaping the market. Modern Economically-Based Case Analysis Supports Approval Prior to the mid-1970s, the U.S. Supreme Court routinely upheld federal government merger challenges, viewing virtually any merger as anticompetitive, without regard to close factual or economic analysis. In General Dynamics(1974), however, a merger between two competing coal companies, the High Court applied a more nuanced approach. It recognized that the acquired firm did not have sufficient uncommitted coal reserves to be a significant future competitive force, and therefore its acquisition did not pose a substantial competitive threat. Although the Supreme Court has not reviewed mergers since the mid-1970s (Congress repealed a law mandating direct appeals of mergers from lower courts to the Supreme Court), it has applied a fact-based, economically-sensitive approach in non-merger antitrust cases. Federal judges have taken this approach to heart in key merger analyses. The district court in FTC v. Steris Corp. (2015) emphasized that speculation about potential future competition does not suffice to block a deal without concrete evidence. Charter and Cox are not current competitors in overlapping markets, and no credible evidence suggests this merger will harm consumer choice or raise prices. Efficiency claims also should matter as Supreme Court Justice (then appeals court judge) Brett Kavanagh stressed in FTC v. Whole Foods Market and United States v. Anthem. The Charter-Cox deal is fully consistent with this principle because it is projected to provide $500 million in annual savings, which will enable substantial investment in rural broadband and next-generation network upgrades. Though he did not author merger cases as an appeals court judge, in his other antitrust opinions Supreme Court Justice (and former antitrust professor) Neil Gorsuch showed dedication to the 'underlying economic efficiency rationale that undergirds modern mainstream antitrust analysis.' Furthermore, the merger should pass muster under Brown Shoe, the Supreme Court's multifactor test for assessing whether a transaction may substantially lessen competition. Although its factors are characterized as 'overinclusive, underinclusive, or irrelevant' by the leading antitrust treatise writer, Professor Herbert Hovenkamp, Brown Shoe is still referenced in current federal merger guidelines and thus cannot be ignored. The Brown Shoe factors center around eliminating existing rivalry, raising entry barriers, and accelerating harmful concentration. None of these are present in Charter-Cox, given the companies' minimal overlap, the influx of new broadband competitors, and the absence of any evidence that consumer choice or pricing would be harmed. Past approvals of transactions such as AT&T/DirecTV and Comcast/NBCUniversal underscore that agencies have recognized the benefits of increased scale when paired with clear consumer advantages. Those deals involved greater overlap and more complex competition issues than Charter-Cox, and yet they were approved, albeit with conditions to preserve competition. This deal presents none of those overlap concerns while offering tangible public-interest benefits, including accelerated broadband expansion and improved service quality. Statutes Mean What They Say — and They Matter Here The Clayton Act only allows the DOJ and FTC to challenge mergers when there is evidence that they may substantially lessen competition, which does not appear to be the case here. Further, Congress has empowered agencies to review mergers, but those powers are not unchecked. The Communications Act asks that the FCC approve license transfers if they serve the 'public interest, convenience, and necessity.' The Charter-Cox merger includes commitments to expand fiber infrastructure and improve broadband access, especially in underserved rural areas, directly advancing the FCC's statutory mandate to promote widespread, reliable, high-speed internet service. Judicial and Congressional Checks on Agency Overreach Courts require agencies to provide reasoned, evidence-supported analyses, and they don't hesitate to override agency decisions when necessary. Congress also plays a vital oversight role over federal enforcement through the House and Senate Judiciary and Commerce Committees. This legislative check preserves the constitutional separation of powers and guards against regulatory overreach. Conclusion Agencies respecting statutory boundaries and basing their decisions on economic evidence is important, because it is how companies and consumers gain the predictability needed to plan investments that drive innovation and infrastructure. On the other hand, when agencies ignore these limits, the merger approval process turns into a politicized one, where power is shifted from markets to government negotiators. When federal merger enforcement decisions become unpredictable, the rule of law erodes, and regulatory uncertainty deepens. The Trump administration thus far has indicated that it seeks to enhance predictability by reinstituting a commonsense fact-based economically-centered merger review policy. Here's hoping that it will demonstrate its commitment to such an approach by fully assessing the hard facts and recognizing the factors that support the Charter-Cox deal.
