Because "historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities," (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, § 12101 (a)(2)) the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws have been put in place to ensure equal access. Communication barriers along with education, transportation, and architectural barriers are just a few examples of the obstacles that people with disabilities encounter daily. The ADA was signed into law, by President George H.W. Bush in 1990 (Introduction to the ADA, 2014), with the purpose of "[assuring] equality of opportunity [and] full participation" (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, §12101 (a)(7)) in modern society.

The ADA ensures equal access through two main mechanisms. The first is by accommodating the individual with disabilities. This can include providing an American Sign Language interpreter for a person who has hearing loss or allowing a service animal into a restaurant regardless of a no pet rule. Generally, an accommodation must be provided "unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations" (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, § 12182(b)(2)(A)). An entity may also be exempt from providing the accommodation if it can prove that doing so would be an undue burden because of the cost and difficulty (Americans with Disabilities Act Title III Regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 36.104).

The second mechanism is by designing physical facilities under specific scoping requirements. These Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines state the required number of accessible parking spaces, clear door widths, counter heights, and many other design specifications to ensure equal access. New construction must abide by these standards unless it would be structurally impracticable (Americans with Disabilities Act Title III Regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 36.401(c)). Alterations must follow these standards to the maximum extent feasible (Americans with Disabilities Act Title III Regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 36.402(a)); and existing facilities must remove any architectural barriers to access when it is readily achievable (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv)). "The term readily achievable means easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense" (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12181(9)).

The mandate for equal access has been interpreted to apply beyond that of physical structures. For example, in an ADA Title III case the court held that " [i]t would be irrational to conclude that persons who enter an office to purchase services are protected by the ADA, but persons who purchase the same services over the telephone or by mail are not. Congress could not have intended such an absurd result" (Carparts Distrib. Ctr. v. Auto. Wholesaler's Assoc., 1994). In National Association of the Deaf, et. al., v. Netflix Inc. (2012), the court reasoned that the same principles ought to apply to services provided over the internet.

However, The ADA has not been held to apply to video game design. In Stern v. Sony Corp., et al. (2010), a plaintiff with a learning disability brought a suit claiming that Sony violated Title III by failing "to accommodate his disability by modifying … video games … to provide visual and auditory cues" in a manner to make them accessible to the plaintiff. The Court ruled against the plaintiff, holding that Sony is not a place of public accommodation as a manufacturer of video games. Whether video games are a good is somewhat of a grey area. In fact, software companies have traditionally classified games as a service (Lane, 2012). Ultimately, the difficulty in applying the ADA to the medium is that there exists no direct historical equivalent for comparison.

The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act "follows a string of laws, passed in the 1980s and 1990s that were designed to ensure that telephone and television services would be accessible to all Americans with disabilities, and the … law contains groundbreaking protections to enable people with disabilities to access broadband, digital and mobile innovations — the emerging 21st century technologies for which the act is named" (Twenty-First Century).

Before signing the bill into law on October 8, 2010, President Barrack Obama stated, "The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act will make it easier for people who are deaf, blind or live with a visual impairment to do what many of us take for granted — from navigating a TV or DVD menu to sending an email on a smart phone. It sets new standards so that Americans with disabilities can take advantage of the technology our economy depends on. These changes are about guaranteeing equal access, equal opportunity, and equal respect for every American" (Remarks by the President, 2010). The laws purpose is to increase the level of participation in the American political and economic system for individuals with disabilities by "increasing the access of persons with disabilities to modern communications" (Guide, n.d.). In other words, the law recognizes the importance of communication technologies and that any accessibility barriers to these technologies impacts citizen participation. An inaccessible sidewalk or door can restrict a person who uses a wheelchair from entering a public library to enjoy the materials within. Much in the same manner, a television program or film without closed captioning can limit a person with hearing loss's ability to understand the contents therein. Whether the barrier is physical or digital, the impact is the same: inaccessible information for individuals with disabilities. In the modern day of technology, access to digital media is essential. It is how we shop, learn, date, work, and play. The importance for an accessible digital world becomes more significant because the digital market is replacing the physical market. A widely known example of this phenomenon is the demise of the print newspaper (Plunkett, 2005).

In sum, the statutes mentioned above were designed to ensure equal and full participation in the American democracy and economy for individuals with disabilities; and the laws apply to every part of life or at least ought to according to their legislative intent (see National Association of the Deaf, et al. v. Netflix, Inc., 2012). For a number of reasons, including the laws' inability to evolve, individuals with disabilities are being left out of the digital world. "In 2009, a study conducted by the FCC revealed that people with disabilities are less likely to use Internet-based communications technologies: 65 percent of Americans have broadband at home, but only 42 percent of Americans with disabilities have these services" (Horrigan, 2010). A failure to adopt or amend these laws to include new technologies would mean that a part of our society would be segregated for individuals with disabilities and would counter the very essence of these laws.