AXSChat Podcast with Lainey Feingold, disability rights lawyer and author of Structured Negotiation: A Winning Alternative to Lawsuits

Lainey is a disability rights lawyer who has worked to make the digital world more accessible since 1995. She helped negotiate the first web accessibility agreement in the United States in 2000. Since then, she has brought together people with disabilities and public and private sector organizations across the United States to improve digital accessibility. Her negotiating partners have included Bank of America, Major League Baseball, the City and County of San Francisco, and CVS.

Lainey developed and practices Structured Negotiation, a dispute resolution and collaboration strategy that avoids lawsuits and focuses on lasting change and relationship-building. Structured Negotiation has been used to advance accessibility for more than a quarter-century. Lainey is also the author of Structured Negotiation: A Winning Alternative to Lawsuits (2d edition 2021). Her book shares stories and strategies for using Structured Negotiation both to avoid lawsuits and to make filed lawsuits less contentious. It also explores examples of advocates using Structured Negotiation tools outside of a legal context. 

Lainey is also a consultant and an international speaker and trainer on topics including collaborative problem-solving, the digital accessibility legal space, accessibility ethics, accessible procurement, and best practices for baking digital accessibility into policies and practices of organizations large and small. In 2017 Lainey was selected as an American Bar Association Legal Rebel – a group of “innovators who are remaking the legal profession.” She has twice been named a California Lawyer Magazine Attorney of the Year, and in 2022 received the Jim Thatcher Lifetime Achievement award during the Axe-Con conference. More information on Lainey’s website.

Transcript

0:00

This is a draft transcript produced live at the event and corrected for spelling and basic errors. It is not a commercial transcript. AXSCHAT Laney Feingold

NEIL: 0:05

Hello and welcome to Axschat. I'm delighted that we are joined today early morning for Lainey, by Lainey Feingold and late night for me. It's great to have you with us Lainey. We had you on a few years ago. But it's more than past time for having you back again. For those of you that don't know Lainey, Lainey is a lawyer specialising in disability access and has written a book about structured negotiation which is an approach that I greatly admire, which is essentially finding ways for organisations to broker agreement with people to improve accessibility, rather than it all being so adversarial in court. So, welcome Lainey. It's great to have you back and really pleased to have you on the show.

LAINEY: 0:59

It's really great to be here, even though it's only 7, in the morning, as you pointed out in Berkely California, really happy to be in conversation with all of you.

NEIL: 1:09

Thank you. One of the things that you posted recently was that you were looking for support to update one of your posts on legislation around the globe. And I know that my colleagues, chipped in on that. But, how much do you think is known, generally about the volume of accessibility legislation and disability legislation around the globe because even I was quite surprised at the number of laws that are out there now.

LAINEY: 1:48

Yeah, I mean really that pinpoints why I'm trying to update the page. So, I had started this page called accessibility law and policy around the world back in 2013 in honour of global accessibility awareness day. And at the time you know, I really should go back on the way back machine and see how many countries were on there in 2013. It's really been kind of like an explosion and I have to say that I did put it out on Twitter, and Masterdom and LinkedIn that I was asking the community for help in updating it. Because you know, I've worked for myself for 27 years, I don't have any staff and that page has always depended on the generosity of our community. And that post that I put out a couple of weeks ago, I got so many responses, you know, including from you, Neil and your team. And you know from parts of the world that I didn't have and I'm very excited. My goal is to get it all updated, I'm going to put it out at once before, so I'm not doing it piecemeal. And I've a wonderful web developer, Natalie McLeese and she is redesigning the page so, it will be easier for people to use and yeah. So, I don't think people are aware enough. I mean, one good thing is at that that the web accessibility initiative of the W3C. They also have an international page that they are also in the process of updating right now. So, there will be at least those horses plus the G3ITC, the non-profit, they have a wonderful website. I love G3ITC and they keep up with the laws. But I've to say even if you're an organisation it's hard to keep up. I always recommend it, I put at the top of my post, also check these other places. Between all of us, I hope we can paint a picture of how accessibility is really spreading across the globe in terms of policy.

NEIL: 4:06

Yes. I think one of the things, well, when we started up, we went through the process of trying to update the laws for our own internal policy purposes and we were surprised just by how much it had grown and we are in 70 odd countries and over 292 different bits of legislation and policy that we were having to reference.

LAINEY: 4:33

Yeah, I don't want to get people's expectations too high, you know, we are going to do the best we can. It's like a jumping off point. You know, you can go over here. I got this great email from someone I didn't know in Chile who told me what they were doing there. I wrote her back and said thank you so much. And, I only had Argentina and Brazil from South America. And then she sent me more countries in South America that she was aware of that she didn't live in. So, yes.

NEIL: 5:02

I don't know. I think there is a lot and it's gratifying to see the promulgation of accessibility requirements across the globe. I really hope that the legislations that get enacted have some kind of consistency and are pointing to standards, so that we don't end up with fragmentation of requirements because I think that that is something that, from a global viewpoint, makes it harder to deliver accessible products and services. Now, of course just localisation needs and different cultures have different needs as well. So, there will be some differences but I'm hoping that part of this effort will be to harmonise as best as possible. And I know that certainly Kenya is basing their requirements on EN30154 which also references WCAG, so there is a general thrust and I know Debra has also got a question.

DEBRA: 6:12

Go ahead Lainey, you answer that.

LAINEY: 6:14

Well, I was just, first of all I should say my website because I just referenced the article, so the website is LFlegal.com. And the article will be on there. In the bottom I've a popular article section, it will definitely be on there. But that's what the great thing is about the web content accessibility guidelines, the WCAG because, surprisingly it has become, I guess not surprisingly, but you know, it really is the international underlying standard that most of the regulations and laws are pointing to. And I remember, I was involved with negotiating the first web accessibility agreement in the United States, back in 2000/1999 and you know, I was new in the field and I had met Sean Henry and Judy Brewer and they were like you got to use this standard. Don't just say accessible. Don't just say, works for blind people, who I was working with at the time but got to use a standard because trying to make it this international consistent standard. So, I think that point Neil is really important.

DEBRA: 7:29

And I also think as Neil was talking about harmonisation, I was really glad when we took section 508, in harmonisation in WCAG in the United States, so we could join the rest of the world just saying. I am still am very disappointed with our beautiful country Lainey, that we have not ratified the CRPD. But okay everybody knows, Debra, you know, whoever. But I often hear in these topics, Lainey, well, you Americans, I'm sure you've heard, you Americans, you Americans do things so messy and you get the lawyers and the litigation and it's so messy and your creating these wide divides between each other and a lot of that is absolutely true. But at the same time the thing I always loved about your work, Lainey was you were never what some people, we have a lot of lawyer jokes in the United States, let's just say that and they are not always very nice. Most of them are not nice. But Lainey, you were always different because you actually wanted to work with these brands to make sure they could figure out how to just include us, to truly meaningfully include us. So, I find it interesting that we're doing the harmonisation, I think it's really needed. But I still find these efforts confuse the audience. They confuse, even when we start doing things like for example, the accessibility overlays. Whenever there is some list and the lawyers are fighting and they are suing each other and they are like, no, you're a bad company. No, you're a bad company. There just seems to be so much confusion with all this. And I know that when I'm confused or a client of mine is confused I will come, I have come to you multiple times and asked your advice on how does this work. But I just was wondering if you could just give us hope that all this confusion and harmonisation is actually going to lead to us truly more meaningfully including people with disabilities and more empowering ways in the world. I'm just hoping. So, I know you're going to say yes it is. So, go Lainey.

LAINEY: 9:36

So, I have a great quote that I use in my talks and I'm going to have to put it in the notes afterwards as to who in Kenya said this. But, the quote is that the legal framework gives us permission to dream.

DEBRA: 9:58

Oh.

LAINEY: 9:59

So, I just love that, because we have the legal framework here. And, we are growing, I say we, the global community is growing that framework around the world. And yes, people don't like lawyers and people make fun of lawyers and all of this. The truth is, is that the framework allows not just a dream but to act on the dreams. So, I am very big on the legal framework. I think that having the rights, the right to digital accessibility, which is a human right around the globe. It's baked into the CRPD. That's critical. How we use those rights should not affect the importance of the rights and the why. Which is why, I talk about the accessibility cookie, which some of you may have heard about, which has all the elements, you know. Accessibility is, it is complex. I don't like the word confusing so much, not that I want to disagree with you Debra, but it's complex, there is a lot of moving pieces. And I feel like the law, I always say the law is a salt. You know, if you don't have salt, you can't get a sweet cookie, seems weird, but if you leave out the salt the sugar doesn't work, I don't know, some chemist can tell us why and the number of one thing is involvement of people with disability, at every stage. So, I, in my talks I like to start with yes, it's a civil right. The ADA happened because the disabled activists advocated and protested and we are recording this, the week after Judy Heumann died. And it's a reminder that this is the core of the legal stuff is about human rights and, you know, there is different ways of enforcement. The truth is in the United States the ADA was drafted so that private people would have the right to file lawsuits to protect those rights. And, that is really important. So, my practice of structured negotiation doesn't use lawsuits. But it uses that same right. It uses that same right for a disabled person to say, hey, I have rights and they were violated. I personally believe we get further with collaboration but it's still based on those same rights.

ANTONIO: 12:37

I was one of the persons putting together, looking at and trying to up mail with the lists within my team and looking for different complexities and different regions and I end up in a situation where a country implemented legislation for the public sector and it took them 20 years to bring that legislation to the private sector and I've seen other scenarios where the Parliament and government that approve it, the regulation and legislation, they were the ones to be at fault of not basically respecting the regulation that they have approved. So, and then, it creates a scenario where, you know, why business should follow the law when government doesn't care about following the law. So, I've seen so many disparities in here. So, that's why it is, in some cases it's good to say that things are moving. But, sometimes I feel that we have legislation, but in fact, you know, it's almost like we haven't because it's not really enforced or it's not really respected.

LAINEY: 14:00

Yes, I mean we have similar problems in the United States in terms of getting, I mean the ADA is a very strong flexible law. It already prevents discrimination and it already requires effective communication, which are really two of the ways to get accessible technology and content. However, we also don't have specific regulations which we need because we want the Chancey Fleet, who if you haven't had on your show, a blind woman here in the United States and a big thinker on all things accessibility and she said once, we need the regulations because it's like the plumbing code. People just have to know it, not question it. It's there, you got to know how to put the pipes in. You got to know how to design for accessibility. But still, even now in the United States Department of Justice, is planning to issuing regulations, I think the current target date for the first step is June of this year, 2023 and they are saying it's only going to be on public sector. So, the private sector lags behind. Public sector is good. State and local government, which is why the legal part is important. But it can't be the only thing. We have to be working with public/private sector on the value to employees, the how it fits into diversity, equity and inclusion. How it fits into ESG Environmental and Social Government. We have to look at the leadership and say, hey they're doing it, you need to do it too so, yeah, I mean there is also different ways of enforcing. I know in the EU there's planning to be more reporting and is that a motivator, people don't like the lawsuits here. I myself have written on some types of law suits in the US that I don't consider to be ethical but the truth is, there is a lot of ethical law suits too. There is a lot of organisations that get approached with a problem and instead of sitting down and working it out, they decide to fight it. So, we need the tools, we have in the US. The lawsuit possibilities. And we have to use those tools with ethics. That's how I see it.

DEBRA: 16:28

Lainey, I totally agree. I personally have not sued people, it doesn't mean I wouldn't. I am an American but I've been glad to see corporations being sued in the United States. I've been glad to see the efforts only because we have had the Americans with Disability Act since 1990, so if you're not including us, maybe our legal system does need to sit in. Regardless of whether we are messy, I personally as an individual, I'm glad that we are doing it. But I also am seeing other problems that I'm curious, if you can add advise us how to deal with things like this, Lainey and we are taking these issues on here at Axschat as well. But, one thing that I'm seeing and I'll just use an example. There was an example in the United States, where a very large corporation, was being attacked because of their voice technology and there were multiple voice technologies companies being attacked and the thing that concerned me, for example about it or my firm about this, was that what the legislators were proposing would have hurt the communities of people with disabilities who were using these voice technologies to stay independent. And there were other concerns in the legislation that I definitely felt should be addressed but what I did not want for them to do this legislation and then our community be impacted negatively from that. And so, we were talking to the legislators and the corporations that were involved and the legislators said well, wait a minute, we went to your community and we asked them if this was okay. And they're like, that's fine but the problem is the people they went do not understand the nuances of the technology. So, one thing I'm saying to the community of individuals with lived experience with disabilities, is we have to educate ourselves. Any technology changes that are taking place in your countries could possibly impact us and we need to get more technology savvy and be able to have these conversations in a way that the legislators hear. But I often do not see that happening and I worry about that because I think we keep not only missing opportunities but we keep hurting ourselves because we haven't taken the time to really educate ourselves on how do we meaningfully enjoy these conversations and yes, nothing about us without us. But 80 85% of our community have hidden disabilities like Neil and myself and I know they are big questions, Lainey, I know they are big questions, but I'm just curious, if you have any guidance. What we are telling on Axschat, is we are telling the stories, get the information out there and so, I know we have all the role to play, okay Lainey. Get your magic wand out please?

LAINEY: 19:10

Yes, well, I should have said at the top that I am a lawyer like you all said. But you know in my public presentations and this kind of conversation, which I know will be public but feels nice and intimate here in the back conversation. I am not giving any legal advice, if people have a legal problem they need to talk to a lawyer. So, yeah, I heard you say advise and so, I say oh wait, I better clarify that. You know, I think the history of the ADA is a good place to look for that because the organisations spearheading the ADA over many years, did that work to bring the communities together and to bring what used to be, you know a separate organisation perhaps for this disability and in a different one for that disability together for the common good and, you know, just thinking about the capital crawl, which was an activist moment before the ADA, where people using wheelchair and mobility devices left them at the bottom of the stairs in the Capital Building, you know, the main government building in the United States, which we know now, which has another part of history but going back before that. The capital crawl and people crawl up those steps to say, you know, we can't even get to the seat of government here. Like something has to change. And you all the tech barriers that we talk about in accessibility, those are today's steps. It sounds you know, we say this, but that's what it is. So, we need to find the common ground and I like what you say about each individual kind of has, it's almost like a chorus, each individual has to tell their story and it has to come together in a way that it can never be unified. Disability can be, like any other community. People are people. And you're never going to get everyone agreeing but we have some wonderful leadership organisations and people who have questions about if they get asked by media, what do you think of this or that, we are kind of having to answer on two levels, the level of what we personally think and the level of what we think is best for the community and you know, I can say that I had to struggle for a long time about how to talk about the lawsuits that people refer to as drive by or you know, cereal firers, because I believe in law suits and I believe in civil rights laws less. I don't believe in the way a lot of people do those lawsuits. But not everyone. So, I used to just not say anything because you know, I didn't want to be misquoted. Oh, Lainey doesn't believe in lawsuits. So, the reason I started thinking about that is I was called by the New York Times to make a comment on someone who had filed 80 law suits against art galleries in the period of a month which, I know from doing this work for 27 years, you can't possibly do 80 law suits in a month and give it the kind of attention. Because, these are really issues that the law deals with. You know, people who can't access their banking. People who can't access their social engagement choices. They're real things. So, I forced myself to really look at it and realise you have to talk about things on a couple of levels. You have to be respectful of the community and the community's views on things and you have to review the personal experiences that you may have. So, it's hard. It's not easy. I guess, you're right, it's messy. I think messy might be an okay ward, confusing. But, yes, it can be messy. But we have a wonderful community. We have a wonderful community organisations you know, the AAPD and DREDF and ACV and NFB, MAD.

DEBRA: 23:21

WID.

LAINEY: 23:23

DR. I almost didn't say one, because once you start with a list.

DEBRA: 23:28

I know. Now, we can say Billion Strong just because I'm here.

LAINEY: 23:32

Billion Strong, I also remembered DRICD and apologies to anyone I missed. But say that we have a support of an amazing eco system of non-profit organisations to help guide us in this kind of work.

DEBRA: 23:52

Neil, I know you were going to try to make a comment. But you're having Wi-Fi problems in Thailand?

NEIL: 23:58

No, no. I am back it wasn't the Wi-Fi that was the problem it was my klutziness and the fact that I hit the Siri button which then just completely screwed with my Bluetooth headset. It wouldn't give it back, so I couldn't hear, so I had to leave and come back. So, apologies for that. I think you know, Lainey was talking previously about the need for lawsuits and I think we definitely need tests cases. You know, we need case law as well as statute law because, it's the case law that actually really starts to define you know, some of the more detailed parts of the arguments around how you interpret what is on the statute books. So, I was typing in the chat before actually the European Commission, says the European Accessibility Act doesn't apply to them because they make the law. Right?

DEBRA: 25:08

Feels like our Congress.

NEIL: 25:10

Yes. Now, that's problematic when they don't honour the law because the -- but, also one of the conversations that we have had with the European Commission is actually well, you know, I think the law is ambiguous and they are like, well if you get sued then you're breaking it. So, I think that's where case law becomes really important. I think that defining what is expected of the law is also important but case law helps iron out some of those areas where the definitions are somewhat ambiguous or people are open to interpretation. So, I mean, what I was going to ask Lainey was, were there particular examples of ambiguity that were solved either to your knowledge through case law or through the negations that you have entered into or was it just that you were encountering you know wilful ignorance?

LIANEY: 26:19

There is a lot of lack of awareness. Let's put it that way.

NEIL: 26:25

Mm hmm.

LAINEY: 26:27

Well, yeah, case law has been really important. Sometimes you know, my talks, I ask, how many have heard with the first web accessibility, we've done Bank of America. We have done deals with major league baseball and CVS and a lot of major companies and I'll say how many have heard of this that the other that I've worked and you now, on few people depending and then I'm like, how many have ever heard about the Target lawsuit? And, you know, everyone has heard of the Target lawsuit, as it should be. Because the Target lawsuit was one of the first contested lawsuits in the United States in 2008. So now, it's what, 15 years old now. That looked at one of the issues that's still an issue which is, you know, the ADA talks in terms of places of public accommodation. So, that does have to be a physical place or can it be a web only business. And, in the United States, the United States doesn't just have one law, it doesn't just have one court that decides things. There are different districts and even today there are discussions in some parts of the country, it's not as clear, if you can sue a web only business. So, that place thing is an example of ambiguity. The beauty of structured negotiations and I tell these stories in my book, is that we can kind of skip that stuff. We can kind of say, well, you maybe your web only business. But these are your customers who are blind and can't use your platform. You know, let's get down to it and fix it. And I think the precedent, the legal precedent is critical. There's a lot of good work done around colleges and universities. Some early law suits, there's a woman named Laura Karlson who keeps a website, I make sure give you the link for your notes, who keeps a website of all Higher Ed legal accessibility cases. So, some of the early ones are really good. They end up settling but they were initially filed until you see all the elements that makes for a really accessible campus. Another thing, I've experienced is there is also industry precedent. A lot of companies don't want to be first, but they also don't want to be last. So, in structure negotiation, for example we have done a lot of work on talking prescription labels. So, blind people, know what is in the medication model. It seems obvious to health and safety issue as well as an accessibility issue and the very first company offer talking labels was as a result of structured negotiation, was Walmart and because Walmart did it and continued to take a leadership role other companies said, oh, this is something. And, you know it helps build a supply chain for the accessible prescriptions and just last summer CVS who we have also worked with again without a lawsuit they built their talking label programme right into their mainstream app, the CVS app that you get so, that was all done. And I don't think there was a prescription lawsuit filed. But we and the American Council of the Blind. Individual blind people. Worked with most of the major pharmacies. So, we need the law suits and there are ways to create the precedent through collaboration again using that legal framework, maybe not necessarily with a lawsuit. But Target was big. Another big one, the Netflix case in 2012. So, four years after Target, there was a lawsuit that I think the National Association of the Deaf did against Netflix for not having captions. That obviously doesn't have a physical place. It was in Massachusetts, not California not like the Target case, it came out with a decision that said yes, captions are required. Even though this is a web only business. So, there have been pivotal cases those are two that come to mind.

ANTONIO: 30:54

And, I was talking with a colleague this morning that was telling me, well, I'm not allowed to use some type of the assistive technology in my country because security doesn't allow it. So, we end up within this between accessible and security. How do you see us being able to manage you know these two fields that sometimes collide in our lives?

DEBRA: 31:26

Well, this is a, I don't want to call it pet peeve. It's an important topic that I always try to work into whatever I'm speaking about because those are of us in the space often say, well accessibility is like security and privacy, it has to be given the same priority, it has to, you shouldn't be able to release something. Just like you can't release with security or a privacy problem, you shouldn't be able to release with accessibility. And I'm always saying, it's not just like security and privacy. It is security and privacy for disabled people. Accessibility is security and privacy because if a disabled person can't independently do a task that was designed for independence, they are going to break that independence and have to ask for outside help or have to share confidential information. We see this in healthcare, in finance, but it's not just those fields. People want to do things independently. That's what this is all about. So, I think when it comes to that conflict, it's almost not a conflict. You have to allow the assistive technology or there is no going to be security for the person who needs it. Now, I know that's easier said than done by security teams but those things just have to be fixed. I mean, if for some reason, there is some technology reason that there is an actual head on conflict and you can't do them both and the technology has to be fixed, the security side of it has to be corrected to make sure everybody has security and privacy, including people with disability.

NEIL: 33:27

It's quite frequent. And, it's really interesting to see the sort of cogs going around in the security guys heads, when you say, well, would you like it if I turned around to you and said actually, no, this is security stuff doesn't matter, we are going ahead and releasing it anyway and sort of then, sort of putting themselves in the position of the accessibility people suddenly they are like, oh no, we probably wouldn't but, it is weird that they don't, they have not taken you know, that sort of a step backwards and objective viewpoint from the perspective of another important function within a business. And it's not you know, one business, it's across the board. You know. It's not.

DEBRA: 34:28

This is why the employment of people with disabilities is essential to this work because I really I don't know if had Sarah Hendron on your show, she wrote a book,"What can a body do?" And she wrote an article probably ten years ago called,"All technology is assistive technology," and I just kind of shifted my thinking, like what if you said to the person I'm taking away your keyboard because that's assistive technology for you, you need it to enter so, some else is going to have to enter your confidential information for you. Yeah, some people need a mouse stick, or some people can't use a mouse whatever it may, we are all doing something to get the information and to enter the information. So, when you have a disabled person on the team, that is a lot easier to understand. I was talking to a company I do some consulting with big companies and they are saying, you know, we have this one team that's so great and we were like, what was the secret sauce of that team that made them, you know not put out products with accessibility barriers and then we realise, oh yeah, that team has a deaf person on it. You know. It's like it's not really rocket science, it makes total sense. It's the same as having all sorts of diversity on your team. Race, gender, LGBT, that has to be rule number one, hiring disabled people to get accessibility, I think. That's number one ingredient in the accessibility cookie.

NEIL: 36:22

So, I think we're close to end of our time but I want to comment on that because it's something that has come up in conversation this last week was, yes, by all means, you know, hire disabled people, if you want your applications to be accessible. But also the additional effort that disabled employees have to make in order to self-advocate is often underestimated and I think that it does lead to burnout and exhaustion and also, there was this question of well, what happens in your personal life. Do you advocate all of the time? Are you checking stuff all of the time. And actually, you have to say, no, I'm not going Twitter looking to find people that haven't posted alt text, you know because, you know, my day job is tiring enough but I do think that there is a sort of balance there. So, we need to also recognise the emotional and physical labour that people go through to do all of this stuff on top of the sort of 9 to 5 work that they are doing as well and sometimes that doesn't get appreciated.

LAINEY: 37:47

I think that's really important and true and disabled people shouldn't have to do accessibility work off of the side of the desk. And there's plenty of disabled people who don't want to do the accessibility stuff, they want to be managers or CEO or whatever it is, the finance person and obviously should get to be that. I think the burnout question is a really important one to look at. And, I think part of the problem we have now is there is not enough people with disabilities throughout the company. So, when there is only a few then it's like, oh let me just check this with so and so and that can take a toll. I totally agree with you.

NEIL: 38:30

Yes, yes thank you. So, Lainey, thank you go on one final?

DEBRA: 38:38

I just want to make one quick comment, I apologise for interrupting, thank you. But you know, I want to make one more little comment to what you all just said, Lainey that corporations don't have enough people so they're counting on one or two people. I just want to remind corporate brands that you definitely do have people with disabilities working for you but whether or not we want to identify to you or whether or not we feel that it's safe for us to identity with you. So, just remember we are definitely there. You might not be take making it a self-place for us. Sorry, Lainey.

LAINEY: 39:09

Yes, that self ID is a crucial thing. Also, I think this week we already mentioned, the week started with Judy Heumann's funeral, I also want to say that Microsoft, who is as we know, a leadership company in the space, they ran their ability summit this week and it was really beautiful. And they recorded the whole thing. It's online. They are not the only company out there but when we say there is not enough disabled people in companies, you know we need to honour the companies, who are really. I know you had on Catherine Nichols from Salesforce, who is doing a tremendous job and her whole team. And you know, I am not going to make a list here because I'll lose track. But we have to learn from the companies who are out there in front and the good thing about the Ability Summit is they had some interviews with other companies who are also people we can learn from. All true.

NEIL: 40:12

Yeah, so I watched some of it as well and I think that what was encouraging was the CIO interviews that they were doing because it was showing that this is the executive level of engagement in large corporates is increasing as is the maturity. So, it's generally encouraging but we are not retiring any time soon.

LAINEY: 40:39

No, we can't retire it, we can but we are not going to. I see in the chat Debra mentioned Dixy Dominos, of course went on for so long. I forget to mention that. I do have a legal update tab on my website where I try this write about the big cases. So, we can check that out. Thank you guys so much. My goodness this was really fun.

DEBRA: 41:05

We love your work and we love you as part of our community Lainey, thank you, thank you.

NEIL: 41:11

Thank you and just remains for me to thank My ClearText for keeping us accessible and captioned.