The ADA was passed in 1990. What's Berkeley's excuse here.
Barring some public funding to make it possible for institutions to caption videos, which would be the reasonable solution, the demand for captioning vastly raises the barriers towards putting content online.
They could have spread the cost over the 25 years the law has been in place instead of leaving it all until now.
This is entirely separate from your examples, as people in india arent taking american buses or elevators - but they most certainly are taking advantage of american educational content that is publicly available.
Because it's prohibitively expensive, or because they can't be arsed?
I used to assume the prohibitively expensive angle, but DEF CON has had live closed captioning for 3 or 4 years now, and is done so the recorded material can be used in classrooms with accessibility requirements. If DT can afford it, I have little regard for people who pretend to be committed to educating the masses and still don't bother.
legacy content that is 3-10 years oldSome wider implications are very alarming. Consider all of the video content that libraries hold. If it's not ADA-compliant, having it available to the general public is arguably discriminatory.