The members of this forum may want to review the following white paper - Universally Designed Technology Solutions - People Who Have Difficulty Walking & the Segway:
Since I cannot post links yet, go to DRAFT (dot) ORG in the Education and Advocacy section (documents and links) to view the PDF.
A couple of passages from the white paper to consider:
The Segway is an electrically powered, self
balancing, non-tandem two wheeled device, and
classified as a consumer product. With its
introduction people who had difficulty walking
but could stand now had an option available to
them which would allow them mobility while
allowing them to remain standing. This includes
people who have conditions such as multiple
sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, Parkinson's disease,
amputations, COPD, spina bifida, traumatic burn
injuries, traumatic brain injuries, and many
neurological conditions.
For those having the ability to use the Segway as
an assistive device it offers them mobility more
consistent with that which they enjoyed prior to
becoming disabled. They are able to reach things
from high shelves, move in and out of tight spaces,
including closets and even move about the kitchen
in a manner consistent with their pre-disability
movements. They are able to better see and be
seen when interacting with others. The mere act
of passive standing has dramatic physiological and
psychological benefits.
Individuals with disabilities who have a substantial
limitation in their ability to walk require an
assistive device, its use is not a convenience or an
option - it is a fundamental necessity for their
activities of daily living. It would be a rare case
indeed for an individual with a disability not to
own the assistive device which best met their
unique and specific needs.
The class of people who have a "substantial
limitation" and those who rent or use "electric
convenience vehicles" for occasional use are
distinctly different in their needs, their operational
experience, and their rights under the law. It is
not devices that are protected under the law; it is
an individual’s substantial limitation.
For some operators of large amusement parks the
electric convenience vehicle has become a source of
income often times renting at daily rates that
exceed those charged by automobile rental
companies to rent an automobile.
As a result many are encouraging guests who are
not disabled but who may have concerns about
their stamina to seriously consider using a
wheelchair, personal
scooter or electric
convenience vehicle while visiting the venue. They
are also advised that they are available for rent on a
first-come first-served basis.
While ECV rentals have become a very lucrative
market for corporate America, they have become
very problematic for people with disabilities who
rely on an assistive device for their basic mobility.
Users of electric convenience vehicles are typically
inexperienced in their operation creating an
increased risk for injury to others and they are
oblivious to mobility device etiquette when
interacting with others.
Most people with disabilities are supportive of an
atmosphere where people who have mobility
challenges will be accommodated in the most
appropriate way possible. They're also aware of
the fact that, with electric convenience vehicles
already becoming ubiquitous, merchants, mall
operators and the operators of large amusement
parks should make every effort to make them only
available to those who have a reasonable need.
In 1991 in publishing the first regulations
implementing the ADA U. S. Attorney General
Richard Thornburgh consistently made reference
to the fact that there would be no exhaustive list of
devices and services because any attempt to do so
would omit the new devices that would become
available with new and emerging technology.
The 1973 Rehabilitation Act as amended in 1998,
in the definitions contained in that act, applicable
to every section of that act, including section 504,
defined an assistive technology device as "any
item, piece of equipment, or product system,
whether acquired commercially, modified, or
customized, that is used to increase, maintain,
or improve functional capabilities of
individuals with disabilities."
It is an all encompassing definition and includes all
items from Segways to wheelchairs. There is
absolutely no definition or mention of any other
type of assistive device, including a wheelchair or
scooter in the entire 1973 Rehabilitation Act as
amended in 1998, nor does there need to be.
There is much more contained in the white paper and I encourage people to review it carefully.
The bottom line in the lawsuit is "WorldCo" is taking the position that Segways are not safe. They have not provided any evidence to support this position (that I'm aware of).
Disability rights groups (such as DRAFT) argue WorldCo is in direct violation of the ADA.
To see some of the people DRAFT is fighting for, go to Segs4Vets (dot) ORG for further information.
I hope this helps shed some light on the issue.