This is topic AMC Sued Over Non Functional ALD Devices in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007380

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 02-17-2016, 04:05 PM:
 
CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST AMC
OVER BROKEN AUDIO DESCRIPTION HEADSETS
Story Link

SANTA CLARA, Calif. (KGO) --
A national movie theater chain is under fire by blind customers for not
allowing them to enjoy movies. The suit was filed in San Francisco on Tuesday.

It used to be up to family members or friends to whisper into the ears of blind
people to describe scene changes or body language that dialogue doesn't convey,
but technology was supposed to change all of that. The nationwide class action
lawsuit, however, claims AMC's devices frequently don't work.

Moviegoers shelled out $11 billion at the box office last year, not including
money spent on popcorn, candy and drinks.

"We all want to have the same experience, the same escapism, the same
access to entertainment," class action lawsuit plaintiff Scott Blanks said.

However, that hasn't happened at the AMC Theatres Scott Blanks has
patronized in San Francisco and the East Bay.

The special audio description headsets have failed consistently for several
years, leaving Blanks disappointed and frustrated when he went to a movie
with his sons.

"I wasn't able to communicate with my boys, Zachary and Elliott, about what
was happening for the remainder of the film or afterwards so much because
I missed out on a great deal of the action in a film that is not exactly heavy
on dialogue," Blanks said.

AMC promotes its audio description technology online. And here's an example
of what a blind person hears during a scene with no words: "Two scientists
stand before a flask of orange liquid. One tries to pour a test tube of green
liquid in, but the liquid doesn't move."

A class action lawsuit has been filed against AMC on behalf of five
individuals and two advocacy groups. But only after attorney Michael Nunez
sent letters to the theater chain, urging it to get staff to maintain the equipment.

"AMC by and large has the technology in many of its theaters and needs to go
that extra mile to take those last steps to insure that it's actually effectively
provided to blind movie-goers," Blanks' attorney Michael Nunez said.

ABC7 News reached out to AMC corporate offices, but did not get a response.
<END>

> The original story contains a hyperlink to download the complaint document,
but I cannot seem to copy it here<
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-17-2016, 04:26 PM:
 
Whereas there is currently no law requiring the devices (there is supposed to be a decision later this year), I wonder how they can claim discrimination while the legislation is still pending. Is the theatre supposed to speculate as to what they are to provide?

That said, if you are going to boast that you are equipped to augment the show for the blind, you should deliver on what you claim.
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 02-17-2016, 05:05 PM:
 
I'm guessing it probably comes down to promoting an accessibility device that does not function as advertised. Since this was probably a selling point in the family going to the movies, the claim is not without merit.

I'm really curious to see what kind of law/policy the Justice Department will enact regarding these devices. We have been providing usage logs to NATO for close to 3 years to help demonstrate the actual level of need for the units.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 02-17-2016, 05:19 PM:
 
This claim is also true of at least one Regal location. Advertised online, but not available....
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-17-2016, 05:36 PM:
 
What is the level of usage for these things? In over twenty years of operation, my theatre has had exactly zero requests or inquiries about that sort of thing. The odd time I get someone in a wheelchair coming to a show but I do have wheelchair parking spaces in the auditorium (required by the building regulations) so that's not a problem, but any other "assistive technology"? Nobody has ever asked any questions about any of it, ever.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-17-2016, 06:27 PM:
 
Maybe about a half dozen requests in the 37 years I've been in the business, if that. For sure no more than 10 requests.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 02-17-2016, 08:47 PM:
 
We have half a dozen of the infrared headphones that are so common, then we got the cupholder mount CaptiView caption devices within the last couple of years.

They get used at least weekly, sometimes every other day. It's rare that there's more than one of each kind out at a time, but even that happens occasionally.

No descriptive audio devices though despite the occasional request. We had a upset customer call about it just last week.
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 02-17-2016, 09:08 PM:
 
We have the USL system which has closed captioning and visually impaired narration, as well as regular assisted listening. The signal is transmitted by an IR panel in the auditorium, so there is no need to set channels - aside from the A/B channel for regular assisted listening or visually impaired narration.

The regular assisted listening is used probably a a dozen times a week depending on the movie. When we have something which appeals to seniors they are used much more heavily.

The closed captioning units are used probably 3-4 times a week. We only had very sporadic requests for the units before we installed the system. Now we have 3-4 customers who are using them frequently. One woman comes at least once a week, and some times more.

The visually impaired narration only has one regular user, but she comes with her husband at least once a week and absolutely loves that we have the system. Since they use the same headsets as the regular assisted listening, there is no added cost. We just have to press a button on the back of the units.

What's been nice about the units is it has provided a new avenue for quality customer service. When I observe someone who is deaf, I offer the use of the units. Some turn them down, others are happy to have them. Same thing with the visually impaired narration.

We have had some especially grateful people who were visiting from out of town and said their local theatre doesn't have the systems. I always tell them to inquire because they are becoming so common with digital systems.

As for equipment, we have 2 closed captioning boxes and about 10 headsets. We have had both cc units checked out at the same time a couple of different times. Once was two people in the same family, others were just pure coincidence. We keep 4 of the headsets ready to check out, and I can only remember one occasion where we have ever had more than 4 out at once. In this case I just grabbed another unit from the office.

If my memory is correct, the original discussion from the Justice Department wanted to require enough units to cover something like 10% of seating capacity. Because of our logs, we have been able to show that less than 1% is needed to satisfy demand. And I believe similar numbers have been reported by other theatres.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-18-2016, 06:13 AM:
 
For assistive listening, it is currently 4% of seating capacity (US ADA requirements). VI-N and Captioning are the two that are to be determined this year by the DOJ.

I note that AMC was boasting that the VI-N stuff is via Fadellio (Doremi/Dolby). I can say, it has been a bit of a chore to keep those up to date. Transmitters can only be updated by moving the tablet to each transmitter for update (and there have been several significant ones) and the receivers can be updated once the transmitters are (you tend to do them as a team)...fortunately, the receivers can be updated in the same configuration port.

The Captioning (Captiview) can be updated via Ethernet to the device directly (and there have been SIGNIFICANT updates to that in the last 12 months too)...having servers keep up with the various captioning changes to keep servers/captioning devices talking can be a challenge.

I can say that in the past 6-9 months, our Doremi/Dolby ADA device complaints have gone way down so I wonder if they are just not keeping up with the updates.

We have also had a fair share of tablet failures (and THEY need updates too). It is way too common to have to unplug/plug in the configuration tray to the tablet to get things to respond.

The USL UPC-28c has been the most pain-free for us though in a large single with a balcony, one isn't going to get as good a coverage as an RF based system. At least one can update it (and MONITOR the captioning part) remotely. There is a debug screen on its web GUI where one can see the time code of the server and when the next time in/out is and watch the text come up/leave to verify that all is well.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-19-2016, 06:36 PM:
 
Summaries of comments filed in the DOJ proceeding along with links to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and links to the filed comments are available at http://hallikainen.org/org/DojNprm/ . At ICTA, I heard the DOJ may act on this in the first half of this year.

Harold
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-19-2016, 08:36 PM:
 
Interesting quote from lawsuit:

46. AMC has also denied Plaintiff Leah Gardner audio description services at AMC theaters. Ms. Gardner enjoys seeing films in the theater and goes to AMC theaters once every few months. In February of 2015, Ms. Gardner went to the AMC Bay Street theater in Emeryville, California to see The Imitation Game. She asked AMC staff for an audio descriptiondevice for the film. AMC staff provided her with numerous audio description receivers that did not work at all. Finally, AMC staff provided Ms. Gardner with a receiver that did work, but when the movie started, Ms. Gardner discovered that the device was programmed for the wrong movie. Instead of providing Ms. Gardner with audio description for The Imitation Game, AMC provided her with audio description for Fifty Shades of Grey. Thus, she was unable to fully enjoy the movie that she had paid to see.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-20-2016, 07:49 AM:
 
A downside to the RF approach is that one has to either have specific receivers set to specific theatres OR have TRAINED staff that can change the programming. The Fidelio system has a relatively simple configuration station to make the switch (literally seconds) BUT that station has to be available and working!

With the IR approach...every receiver works in every theatre...no programming but you may have coverage issues in the extremes of the theatre.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-20-2016, 10:25 AM:
 
What we do in our service area is to pre-program 2 receivers per auditorium for the HI and then put a professional label on them (from a P-touch or a Brady). Then we instruct management to LEAVE THEM programmed that way.

Then we get 1 receiver per auditorium and program them for VI, label them and instruct management to LEAVE THEM programmed that way.

Far greater than 99% of the time the piles of spare receivers will never even need to be used, but of course with the laws in place that "pile of spare receivers" are there and ready to be programmed on the fly to handle something like a busload of kids from a visually handicapped school, etc.

It also puts an end to the day-to-day mis-programming and will extend the life of the tablet since it isn't being messed with every day.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-20-2016, 12:26 PM:
 
Except...notice they complained about being handed SEVERAL non-functional receivers. So what if the ones that are labeled die while waiting for use? How often do you update your tablet, transmitter and receiver (have to do those on-site)?...if people are used to configuring the receivers...when they are asked for, what are the odds that the people on the clock at that moment are properly trained? And then...what are the odds that you can merely drop the receiver in the configuration port and the thing actually work? I can tell you that more often than not, if it has been on for some time, the USB cable will need to be pulled/reinserted for the config port to start working again.

Another complaint with the Fidelio I have traditionally received is lack of volume. The latest (within the last 12 months) transmitter/receiver updates seems to have "fixed" that...which is why I asked regarding the OP...when were the systems last updated? If nothing else, if you update your systems annually, you'll, at least, know if you have dead or damaged ones!
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-25-2016, 05:03 PM:
 
Unless something has changed, you are required by Federal mandate to have 4% hearing impaired devices. Yes, we agree that is too many. Nothing, however, says they have to function.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 02-25-2016, 05:16 PM:
 
Louis while that maybe the letter of the law, I bet a jury will side with the plaintive unless one can prove that repairs were actively being made.
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 02-25-2016, 07:36 PM:
 
Stephan, I think that's why the best practice would be to log them in and out with every use, and maintain those logs indefinitely. We have 4 headsets ready for use at any given time - with more in the office if needed. I have 3 years worth of logs showing we have never had more than 4 checked out at any one time. Furthermore, only 2 of those headsets are likely to be checked out even once in a given week, and most of the time we never have more than 1 out at a time.

For my theatre, 4% of the seating capacity would mean about 40 headset. If we were ever challenged, I think I have more than adequate documentation to show we have more than enough headsets to meet demand.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-25-2016, 08:03 PM:
 
The current ALS headset requirement is about 4%. See the table at http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/2010ADAStandards/2010ADAStandards_prt.pdf#page=80 . From the NPRM and comments for the proposed rules for captioning and audio description (summaries of comments, links to comments, and link to NPRM at http://www.hallikainen.org/org/DojNprm/ ), it appears that the DOJ may have looked at the percentage of the entire population that has a hearing impairment and used that percentage as the requirement. The movie-going audience is probably not a uniform cross-section of the populations (the teenagers that turn out in huge numbers for blockbusters do not have a hearing impairment... yet). Further, the degree of impairment in the percentage they came up with may not be enough to require an assistive listening system in cinema. These, and other factors, probably led to the rule requiring many more receivers than are actually required. The DOJ appears to have used similar math to determine the proposed quantity requirements for closed captioning and audio description. The NATO comments suggest, instead, a much lower minimum quantity requirement that is updated (every six months, I think) to 150% of the average peak weekly demand for the equipment. This seems like a reasonable method of tying the requirement to local demand instead of trying to apply a uniform number nationwide. The NATO comments suggest a reporting requirement that I don't think the DOJ will go for (get buried in paper).

Harold
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 02-25-2016, 09:13 PM:
 
I bet if AMC was as organized as Justin is they would not be in the fix they currently are. Wish management was as organized where I work.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-26-2016, 08:12 AM:
 
I like Justin's system. Have used it as a precaution. Have also used it to reduce the number of handicapped parking spots.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-26-2016, 09:38 AM:
 
With so many people out there using their smartphones in theaters, it seems to make sense to have an app for captions, descriptions or SAP.

Just broadcast captions on a private Wi-Fi system or something. Only the smartphone app can talk to the caption system. You could also make it so a password like the serial number on your ticket is required to log in.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-26-2016, 12:38 PM:
 
Use of phones as caption and audio receivers has been considered. There are a couple ways to do it. One is, as you suggest, a private wifi network. The USL captioning equipment has a web interface where you can see the captions in real time. This COULD be extended out to the auditorium over wifi. There are various security concerns to consider. You don't want to just put the auditorium network out on public wifi. Another system uses audio signature of the audio in the auditorium to synchronize a previously downloaded caption or audio track. http://www.mylingoapp.com/index.html uses this for language translation. Another wifi system aimed at captions is http://www.dicapta.com/Whatscinema . There's also a European company ("something and something" that I can't think of at the moment) making a system using wifi transmission. I also saw a demo of an Italian (I think) system that used downloaded captions and auditorium audio sync.

Exhibitors don't seem to like the use of patron phones for this purpose, but that may change. Objections include having a bright screen in the auditorium, no way to hold it in a convenient position (like the goose neck on closed caption boxes), and having a camera pointed at the screen. I believe the ADA requires cinemas to provide "auxiliary aids," but the cinema could possibly use a "use your own device" approach and have additional devices for those who do not bring their own.

USL has also demonstrated a system based on the Zola patent (Patent 4859994 ). This uses an LCD projector with the polarizer removed to project a caption bar below the screen. This is a dim green rectangle. People wearing linear polarized glasses see text on the green rectangle. Those without just see the green bar. Exhibitors did not like the green bar below the screen, so further development was suspended.

More thoughts on accessibility technology at http://ftp.uslinc.com/ftp/MultiProduct/Accessibility/AccessibilityBestPractices/AccessibilityBestPractices130425a.pdf .

Thanks!

Harold
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-26-2016, 01:16 PM:
 
Just thinking aloud...

How about a QR code on every ticket, keyed with the date, time and auditorium location? You would have to download a specific app from the theater's website or app store page to zap the QR code. The app would then automatically connect to a private Wi-Fi which has been set to not broadcast its SSID. The app knows the SSID/password then connects automagically.

If the customer wants audio descriptions or SAP, just plug in a set of headphones and put the phone in your pocket. The app just sits in the foreground and plays the audio track that the customer selected.

If the customer wants visual captions, the screen can go into "dark mode" at the click of a button. (i.e. Completely black screen with white text and backlight at minimum brightness.) I have a darkroom timer for my iPad that has a dark mode. It works well.

I'm not necessarily saying that this should be done instead of having headphones and caption displays but it could certainly be a good adjunct to an existing system. In fact, the two systems could work on the same Wi-Fi. Just install once and use it for both.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-26-2016, 02:30 PM:
 
Interesting thoughts. I don't think it necessarily needs to be on a private wifi that requires a passphrase (added complexity). It could go to an HTTPS URL encoded in the QR code on the ticket, or flashed on the screen, or embedded in audio (Google has a method of audibly transmitting URLs - I think it's a shortened URL that goes to them for a lookup like tinyurl).

USL keeps looking at various ways to meet the accessibility (and other) needs of the cinema industry. Right now, IR is the method of choice. We'll see what the future brings.

Thanks for the discussion!

Harold
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 02-26-2016, 02:58 PM:
 
It may seem like everyone owns a smart phone, but in reality that is not so, especially in the "older" demographic that may have increased need for these type of services. If the industry moves to a "smart phone", I suspect you would have still to give out devices anyway to those with dumb phones, along with those who do not want to drain their smart phone battery keeping.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-26-2016, 03:32 PM:
 
I guess I'm in the "older demographic." I have a phone like the ones on Star Trek that flips open.

Harold
 

---

Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 02-26-2016, 06:18 PM:
 
I can say from experience, the Fidelio problems I've seen at my theatre (I won't say the chain, but use your imagination) is the lack of training on its usage. I had a Supervisor tell a customer that we don't have anything like that (when a customer asked for a simple hearing device)! The system is not my favorite. I wish the units themselves didn't need a programming base and software to program it. I get the idea of the system, but the way these theatres are operated, you're asking alot for staff to know how to screw in a light bulb, never mind make sure that a ALD or DV system is programmed correctly. I've had units fail and I've had transmitters fail, but when they're programmed correctly, they seem to work. The Captiview seems to be more reliable than the Fidelio. When you have 12 screens with only 10 head sets, its hard to preprogram and have them charged and ready to go. The Captiview's failure at my theatre is the lack of people shutting the unit off after use and then charging it.

Personally, what I would like to see is some kind of standard signal system that the theatre has to provide. As long as its transmitting, the theatre's end is done. It is then up to the individual customer to provide a standardized receiver that can play back the system. I'm surprised by now there is no bluetooth or wifi enabled system that can be used via an app on a smartphone. All you would need to provide (along with the feed via local transmitter) is a channel or frequency for each auditorium and that can be published on the ticket. Think of it as some kind of blue tooth speaker system.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-26-2016, 06:38 PM:
 
Under current ADA regulations, places of public accommodation have to provide auxiliary devices. There are captioning and audio language translation systems that use an application in the device to synchronize downloaded captions or audio with the auditorium audio. It's quite possible to display captions real time on a web page. Another "bring your own receiver" method for assistive listening is the use of an inductive loop. The receiver is the person's hearing aid. But, room loops are expensive and only handle one channel of audio.

Harold
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-26-2016, 09:01 PM:
 
I want to use WiFi inside the theater so customers don't have to burn their data limit to watch a movie. I thought that the hidden SSID would keep people in the theater who are not using the WiFi for captions from bumming a free connection from the theater and using it during the movie and bother other people.

I like the idea of putting the code up on the screen or piggybacking on the audio. Sounds neat!

To be clear, I don't think that smartphones should be the sole means of receiving captions. The idea is to make them accessible by more people and to make them work more automatically, without need of help from poorly trained theater staff... Which is the whole reason why this subject came up in the first place.

Such a system could be set up and could run all the time, whenever the movie runs. Anybody who wants captions can have them, any time. People who have phones can just use them. People who don't have phones can still borrow a headset or a display.
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 02-28-2016, 12:06 AM:
 
I like the idea of having customers use their own device which captures a feed from the theatre. The MPAA could create an app which connects to the theatre's feed using some sort of handshake method so customers don't need to worry about logging into WiFi - or maybe Bluetooth.

The theatre could maintain a stock of goose neck contraptions which customers could check out to hold their own device. By having some kind of open transmission method/standard, customers could invest in a device which they feel comfortable with, and can use at many different locations.

Of course the theatre would still need to keep a supply of devices for customers who don't have their own.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 02-28-2016, 01:09 PM:
 
Out at our drive-in, we're having more customers ask if they can use the FM radios in their smartphones in lieu of their car radios or some other portable.

We've discouraged these attempts, as I'm pretty sure the radios don't work in real time and, given the variety of devices out there, we couldn't possibly synch with them all.

I wonder if it would be the same with Randy's "in-house wifi" idea. The concept is intriguing, but the hearing impaired would still notice any delays caused by the encoding/decoding process. Could you delay what goes through the projector long enough to account for that and still be within whatever buffer the main sound processor would allow for?
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-28-2016, 01:24 PM:
 
I see no problem with them using the FM radio in their phone though I suspect they are no where near as sensitive as a car radio with an outside antenna. The phone FM receivers are indeed FM receivers. I don't THINK (but do not know) that there is much digital processing introducing latency. Since the previous comment was about drive in theaters, note that the DOJ NPRM on closed captioning and audio description proposes exempting drive in theaters due to a lack of suitable technology and the small number of theaters making the development of such technology expensive (but, there may be a way to adapt a wider use technology).

I wonder about the use of FM transmitters by drive in theaters. It seems that to get the required coverage the radiated field would exceed FCC limits for unlicensed transmitters. Have any theaters been visited by the FCC?

Harold
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 02-28-2016, 06:09 PM:
 

quote: Harold Hallikainen

---

I wonder about the use of FM transmitters by drive in theaters. It seems that to get the required coverage the radiated field would exceed FCC limits for unlicensed transmitters. Have any theaters been visited by the FCC?

---