American School for the Deaf: Legal Risks & Compliance Gaps in Website Terms | Erayaha

When Website Terms Leave You Exposed: ASD’s Legal Risks in Focus

Imagine a scenario where a single privacy complaint triggers a $50,000 regulatory investigation, or a lack of clear accessibility enforcement leads to a Department of Justice (DOJ) action with six-figure settlement demands. Our analysis of the American School for the Deaf’s (ASD) website terms and policies reveals several high-impact legal and logical risks that could result in substantial financial and reputational costs if left unaddressed.

1. Ambiguous Data Use and Consent Language The privacy policy states that ASD will not release personal information to third parties "without your permission," but fails to specify the legal basis for data collection, retention periods, or user rights under laws like CCPA or GDPR. This ambiguity exposes ASD to regulatory penalties up to $7,500 per violation under the CCPA and €20 million or 4% of global revenue under the GDPR.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

We will protect yourcollect, use, and retain personal information only for specified purposes as outlined in this policy, in compliance with applicable privacy laws including the CCPA and GDPR. Personal information will not release your namebe disclosed to third parties without explicit, email address or other personal informationinformed consent, and users have the right to any advertiseraccess, merchantcorrect, or other third parties not related to wwwrequest deletion of their data at any time.asd-1817.org or www.sourceinterpreting.com without your permission.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is vague regarding the legal basis for data processing, user rights, and compliance obligations. The revision clarifies lawful processing, user rights, and regulatory compliance, reducing risk of regulatory fines and litigation.

2. Insufficient Notice of Policy Changes ASD’s policy allows for updates to the privacy policy but does not require notifying users of material changes or obtaining renewed consent. This omission can invalidate user agreements and trigger compliance failures, especially under GDPR Article 13 and CCPA requirements for transparency. Litigation costs for non-compliance can easily exceed $100,000.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

If there arematerial changes are made in the future, the changes will not affect information already collected. Any changes to the www.asd-1817.org and www.sourceinterpreting.comthis privacy policy, we will be available on this page fornotify users via email or prominent notice on our website, and where required by law, obtain renewed consent before applying changes to reviewpreviously collected information.

Legal Explanation

The original clause does not require user notification or renewed consent for material changes, which is required under GDPR and CCPA. The revision ensures transparency and continued enforceability of user agreements.

3. Accessibility Policy Enforcement Loophole While ASD commits to WCAG 2.0 AA standards, the policy lacks specific enforcement mechanisms, timelines for remediation, or penalties for non-compliance. This gap creates exposure to ADA lawsuits, which have resulted in settlements averaging $25,000–$75,000 per case, and can attract DOJ scrutiny.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

If, at any point in time, content is found to be inaccessible, prompt action shall be taken to ensure access. InASD will remediate the event that provisionissue within three (3) business days of access would be impossible without fundamentally altering the content or imposing an undue burden on the Schoolnotice, the School shallor provide an equally -effective alternate method of accessalternative. Failure to comply may result in disciplinary action or contract termination for responsible parties.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks enforceable timelines and accountability measures. The revision introduces clear remediation deadlines and enforcement provisions, aligning with ADA and DOJ expectations.

4. Vague Limitation of Liability and Third-Party Links Disclaimer The terms disclaim responsibility for third-party sites but do not clearly limit ASD’s liability for damages arising from reliance on third-party content or links. This creates a loophole that could result in direct liability for user losses, with potential damages ranging from $10,000 to $500,000 depending on the incident.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

Please be aware that we are not responsibleASD disclaims all liability for the privacy practicesdamages or losses arising from use of other, or reliance on, third-party websites. When leaving or content linked from our websites, be sure to read the privacy statements of each website that collects personally identifiable informationsite. Users access such third-party sites at their own risk.

Legal Explanation

The original clause does not adequately limit ASD's liability for third-party content. The revision provides a clear limitation of liability, reducing exposure to user claims for damages.

---

Conclusion: Proactive Risk Management is Essential Our examination shows that ASD’s current website terms contain critical gaps that could result in major regulatory fines, litigation costs, and reputational harm. Proactive redlining and legal review can help close these loopholes, strengthen enforceability, and protect ASD’s mission and resources.

Are your website terms ready for a privacy audit or DOJ accessibility review?
What would a single compliance failure cost your organization?
How often are your terms and policies reviewed for enforceability?

**This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai’s terms of service for liability limitations.**