Accessibility overlay lawsuits and the accessiBe FTC order

It changes the view.
Not the code.

No. An accessibility overlay can change how a page looks for the visitor who switches it on, but it cannot make a website conform to WCAG, and no US or EU law treats installing one as compliance. In January 2025 the FTC alleged that accessiBe’s claims that its accessWidget could make any website WCAG-compliant were “false, misleading, or unsubstantiated”. The final order, issued on 21 April 2025, made it pay $1 million and bars those claims without evidence. Here is what the order says, what a script can and cannot fix, and a checker for the claims themselves.

Check a claim Start free
FTC Docket C-4817 Final order 21 Apr 2025 · $1,000,000 · 20-year term

By the Builderify team

01 Toolbar on 02 Read the code 03 Check the claim 04 Fix the source
01 / The FTC order

The accessiBe FTC order,
in the Commission’s own words.

The FTC did not rule on overlays as a technology. It acted on advertising: what accessiBe said its accessWidget could do, and how paid reviews of it were presented. accessiBe settled without admitting or denying the allegations.

Docket No. C-4817 · Matter 222-3156
In the Matter of accessiBe Inc. and accessiBe Ltd.
  1. November 2022

    The FTC tells accessiBe what it is investigating, including whether it made “false or unsubstantiated representations” (complaint, paragraph 76).

  2. 3 January 2025

    Proposed consent order announced. Commission vote 5–0, then 30 days of public comment.

  3. 21 April 2025

    Decision and Order issued. It takes effect on publication as a final order on ftc.gov.

  4. 22 April 2025

    The FTC announces the final order, approved 3–0.

  5. Until 2045

    The order runs for 20 years from issuance (Provision XIII); compliance reports and records for up to 10.

What accessiBe was said to have claimed

“Respondents claim that installing accessWidget’s ‘one line of code’ makes a website compliant with 30% of WCAG’s requirements immediately and initiates an AI process that makes the website fully compliant with the remaining 70% of WCAG requirements within 48 hours.”
FTC complaint, paragraph 7

The complaint alleges that sites running accessWidget still had “missing or inaccurate alt text for key images; a missing focus indicator…; keyboard traps…; incorrect headings; and problems with menus, buttons, and tables”, and it names the WCAG criteria involved: 1.1.1, 1.3.1, 2.1.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.7, 3.3.1, 4.1.3, and 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 for media. Section 02 below maps the same criteria.

The three counts

Count I
False or unsubstantiated performance claims

That accessWidget’s AI and other technology “makes any website compliant” with WCAG, and “will continue to ensure accessibility and compliance with WCAG by automatically remediating any changes to a website”.

Count II
Deceptively formatted advertising

That paid reviews, articles and blog posts on third-party sites were presented as “independent opinions by impartial authors or publications”.

Count III
Undisclosed material connections

That accessiBe did not disclose it “paid for the reviews, articles, or blog posts, and/or participated in drafting, editing, or approving them”.

What the final order bars and requires

  1. Provision I: No unsupported WCAG claims

    accessiBe must not claim a covered product “can make any website compliant with WCAG”, “can ensure continued automatic compliance with WCAG over time as website content changes”, or anything about its “benefits, performance, or efficacy”, unless it has “competent and reliable evidence” to substantiate the claim.

  2. Provision II: No misrepresentations

    Of any material fact about any product, including its cost, limitations and performance.

  3. Provision III: No deceptive endorsements

    No pretending that reviews are independent, that an endorser is an ordinary user, or that a reviewer is an independent organisation.

  4. Provision IV: Disclose connections

    Any “unexpected material connection” with an endorser, clearly and conspicuously and in close proximity to the endorsement.

  5. Provision V: Disclose domain limits

    Before a customer pays: the product “will not correct barriers on third-party web domains or subdomains” that do not also use it.

  6. Provision VI: Pay $1,000,000

    To the FTC, which may use it for refunds to customers.

“Covered Product or Service” in the order means anything “represented, expressly or by implication, to correct website accessibility barriers through the use of automated tools, including accessWidget”. The order binds accessiBe and those acting with it, not other vendors.

“It’s advertising law 101: before you claim your product can perform a certain task, you need evidence it will work as promised.”

FTC Business Blog, 23 April 2025

That applies to any business describing its own site, not only to vendors. If your footer says your site is “100% compliant” because of a widget, you are making the claim the order is about. The claim checker below flags the phrases, and the accessibility statement generator writes the honest version.

02 / What a script can fix

Do accessibility widgets work?
Some of it, for some people.

An overlay is a script that runs in the visitor’s browser after your page loads. It can restyle what is there and add attributes to it. It cannot know what your images mean, what your videos say, or how your custom menu is meant to behave. Here is where that line falls, criterion by criterion, in WCAG 2.2.

Of these 12 criteria, a runtime script can genuinely help with 4, gives the visitor a setting for 1, and leaves 7 to your own markup and content.

Twelve WCAG 2.2 success criteria: what an overlay script can do at runtime, and what needs a change to the site itself
Success criterion Level What a script can do at runtime What it takes in your source Verdict
1.1.1 Non-text Content A Guess a description from the image or its file name. The FTC’s complaint quotes results such as “Brown bread on white ceramic plate” for images of filet mignon and bison. Alt text written for what the image does on that page, and alt="" on decoration. Needs your source
1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded) A Nothing reliable. A page script cannot add accurate, synchronised captions to your videos. A captions file you have checked, uploaded with the video. Needs your source
1.3.1 Info and Relationships A Add heading levels or table roles by guessing from size and position, which can be wrong. Real headings, lists, table headers with scope, and fieldsets in the HTML. Needs your source
1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) AA A contrast switch can count: W3C technique G174 accepts a control that switches to a presentation with enough contrast, if the result really reaches 4.5:1 and the control is easy to find. Colours that pass by default, so nobody needs a switch. Script can help
1.4.4 Resize Text AA Text-size controls are a recognised technique too (G178), if they reach 200 percent with nothing cut off or overlapping. Relative units and layouts that survive browser zoom. Script can help
1.4.12 Text Spacing AA A spacing toggle lets a visitor apply extra spacing. The criterion asks that your layout survives when they do, so the toggle is a test, not a fix. No fixed heights or clipped boxes around text. Visitor setting
2.1.1 Keyboard A Add tabindex to clickable boxes, but not the key handling, focus management and state that real buttons, menus and sliders need. <button>, <a> and form controls, or custom widgets built to the ARIA patterns. Needs your source
2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide A A stop-animations switch can halt CSS animation. It may miss video, canvas and carousels driven by script. A pause control on anything that moves, and respect for prefers-reduced-motion. Script can help
2.4.7 Focus Visible AA Add a visible focus outline everywhere. A fair runtime patch if it is on for everyone; a toggle that keyboard users must first find, without visible focus, helps nobody who needs it. A focus style in your own CSS that is never removed. Script can help
2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) AA Nothing to patch, and floating buttons can cause it: a sticky bar, chat bubble or toolbar launcher, an accessibility toolbar’s own included, can cover the element that has focus. Tab through the page and check nothing sits on top of the focused element. Needs your source
3.3.2 Labels or Instructions A Copy a placeholder into a label, if there is one, and guess the rest. A visible <label> tied to each field, with formats and required fields stated. Needs your source
4.1.2 Name, Role, Value A Add ARIA attributes when the page loads, but not keep them in step as an app re-renders. The Overlay Fact Sheet lists React, Angular and Vue interfaces as a limit. Native elements, or ARIA states such as aria-expanded updated by your own code. Needs your source
To be fair

Display settings do help some visitors

Bigger text, more spacing, stronger contrast, a reading guide or no animation can make a page easier for someone who has not set those things up on their own device. W3C even lists page-level controls as accepted techniques for contrast and text size, when they work fully. The FTC’s complaint describes overlays in the same terms: tools that “permit temporary modifications to the user interface”.

And the limit

Conformance is about the page everyone gets

W3C defines conformance as meeting every success criterion, with “no content which violates the success criteria”. One Level A failure, such as an unlabelled form field, and the page does not conform at any level. Most of those failures are in markup and content a toolbar never touches. The WCAG 2.2 checklist walks through all of them.

03 / Claim checker

Accessibility overlay compliance claims,
checked phrase by phrase.

Paste a vendor’s sales line, your own footer badge or a draft accessibility statement. Each risky phrase is marked with the reason, the part of the FTC order or the standard it runs into, and wording you can use instead. It runs in your browser; nothing you type is sent anywhere.

Claim checker 13 patterns · runs in your browser

155 / 800 characters

Or try an example
Rewrite Check Reads well

This is not legal advice. It checks wording against patterns drawn from the FTC’s accessiBe case and W3C’s definition of conformance. It cannot tell whether a claim is true for your site, and a clean result does not mean your site is accessible. For a decision that matters, ask a lawyer who works on accessibility.

Rewrite the flagged claims before you publish them.

4 to rewrite · 1 to check · 0 reading well

Our AI-powered widget makes your website WCAG compliant1 in 48 hours2. One line of code, lawsuit protection3 guaranteed4, and you stay compliant5 automatically.

  1. 1RewriteA tool credited with complianceOur AI-powered widget makes your website WCAG compliantThis is the claim at the centre of the FTC case. Provision I.A of the final order bars accessiBe from saying its automated products “can make any website compliant with WCAG” unless the claim is backed by competent and reliable evidence. The order binds accessiBe; the FTC Act’s rule against unsupported advertising claims applies to everyone.Try insteadOur toolbar lets visitors adjust text size, spacing and contrast for themselves. It does not change our code, and it does not make the site conform to WCAG.FTC final order, Provision I.A
  2. 2CheckA deadlinein 48 hoursFine for a reply time. Attached to compliance, it echoes the claim the FTC’s complaint describes: an AI process that would make a site fully compliant “within 48 hours”. W3C says evaluation tools “can not determine accessibility, they can only assist in doing so”.Try insteadSetup takes a few minutes. Making the site itself accessible takes testing and fixes, which we track in our accessibility statement.FTC complaint, paragraph 7
  3. 3RewriteA promise of legal protectionlawsuit protectionNo tool can promise this. Whether a site is accessible is for courts and regulators to decide; the Overlay Fact Sheet’s signatories conclude that overlays “cannot eliminate legal risk”; and UsableNet counted lawsuits filed in 2025 against companies whose sites already used a widget.Try insteadIf something on our site gets in your way, tell us at [email] and we will fix it or give you another way to do what you need.Overlay Fact Sheet; UsableNet 2025 report
  4. 4RewriteA guarantee or certificateguaranteedA guarantee is a performance claim, and the accessiBe order covers any claim about a product’s “benefits, performance, or efficacy” (Provision I.C). W3C’s own conformance logos carry the note “Claims are not verified by W3C”, so a certificate should say who evaluated what, and when.Try insteadAn independent evaluation by [auditor] on [date] found the site partially conformant with WCAG 2.2 level AA.FTC final order, Provision I.C
  5. 5RewriteCompliance that maintains itselfstay compliantProvision I.B of the order bars accessiBe from claiming its products “can ensure continued automatic compliance with WCAG over time as website content changes” without evidence. New pages, products and embeds bring new issues, and someone has to check them.Try insteadWe check new pages before they go live and review the whole site at least once a year.FTC final order, Provision I.B
04 / The law

Are accessibility overlays legal? Yes.
Does any law count one as compliance? No.

Nothing in the ADA, the FTC Act or the European Accessibility Act forbids putting a toolbar on your site. What they care about is whether the site itself is accessible, and whether what you say about it is true.

United States · Justice Department

The ADA asks for an accessible site, not a product

Its March 2022 web guidance says businesses “have flexibility in how they comply”, and on overlays: “Automated accessibility checkers and overlays that identify or fix problems with your website can be helpful tools, but like other automated tools such as spelling or grammar checkers, they need to be used carefully. A ‘clean’ report does not necessarily mean everything is accessible.”

For state and local governments, a Title II rule published on 24 April 2024 adopts WCAG 2.1 level AA. An interim final rule of 20 April 2026 moved its compliance dates to 26 April 2027 for entities serving 50,000 people or more, and 26 April 2028 for smaller ones and special districts. Businesses open to the public fall under Title III, for which the Department has no regulation setting web standards.

United States · Federal Trade Commission

Claims about compliance need evidence

The FTC Act prohibits deceptive practices in advertising. The accessiBe case applied it to a product’s compliance claims and to paid reviews. In the words of the FTC’s then consumer protection director, Samuel Levine: “Overstating a product’s AI or other capabilities without adequate evidence is deceptive, and the FTC will act to stop it.”

For a vendor, that means evidence before any “makes you compliant” line. For a site owner, it means the badge in your footer is a claim too, and the FTC’s endorsement rules apply to any review you paid for.

European Union · Directive (EU) 2019/882

The EAA names standards, not tools

Since 28 June 2025, covered services must make their websites and apps accessible “by making them perceivable, operable, understandable and robust” (Annex I, Section III(c)). Article 15 presumes conformity for services that meet harmonised standards whose references are published in the Official Journal. Nothing in the Act treats installing a tool as conformity.

ETSI published EN 301 549 V4.1.1 in September 2026, the version written to support the Act, which refers to WCAG 2.2. WCAG 2.2 itself has been an ISO standard, ISO/IEC 40500:2025, since October 2025. Who is covered, and the microenterprise exemption, are in the European Accessibility Act guide for small businesses.

Laws change and so do their dates. Each of the above was checked against the official text on 5 October 2026; the links are in the Sources at the end of the page.

05 / The evidence

Accessibility overlay lawsuits and practitioners’ views,
with what each source actually measures.

Beyond the FTC case, three sources come up whenever overlays are discussed. None of them is a court ruling, and each one answers a narrower question than it is often quoted for.

The Overlay Fact Sheet

overlayfactsheet.com, checked 5 October 2026

A public statement by accessibility practitioners and disabled users, signed by more than 1,000 named people, among them contributors and editors of the WCAG, ARIA and HTML specifications, in-house specialists at large companies, consultants and end users. Its conclusion: “No overlay product on the market can cause a website to become fully compliant with any existing accessibility standard and therefore cannot eliminate legal risk.” It also argues that toolbar features largely duplicate settings users already have, and raises privacy concerns about overlays that detect assistive technology.

What it tells you An expert consensus statement, and an advocacy one: it calls for overlays to be removed. It is not a test result or a legal finding.

UsableNet, 2025 Year-End Digital Accessibility Lawsuit Report

UsableNet, a US accessibility company

It counted 5,114 ADA digital accessibility lawsuits filed in 2025: 3,195 in federal courts and 1,919 in New York and California state courts. Its month-by-month chart of cases against companies using widgets on their sites runs from 95 to 155 a month, 1,416 for the year by our sum, and it concludes that widgets “did not slow litigation in 2025”.

What it tells you How many sued sites had a widget installed. Not whether the widget was the reason, nor how many sites with widgets were never sued.

W3C Web Accessibility Initiative

Selecting Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools

On automated tools in general: “Tools cannot check all accessibility aspects automatically. Human judgement is required.” And: “Web accessibility evaluation tools can not determine accessibility, they can only assist in doing so.”

What it tells you Guidance from the body that writes WCAG. It is about testing tools, and the same limit applies to any tool that tries to repair what it detects.

06 / With Builderify

Builderify’s accessibility menu is a toolbar too.
Here is exactly what it is.

Builderify’s accessibility widget is a visitor-controlled menu, the same category as the toolbars on this page. It has 13 tools in five groups: font size, text spacing and a dyslexia-friendly typeface; underlined links and titles and no animations; more contrast, black and white or inverted colours; a large cursor and focus highlighting; read aloud and a reading guide.

It acts on your page as it already is and does not change your markup, so everything in the “needs your source” column above is still yours to fix. Builderify never claims it makes a site compliant. The honest pitch is smaller: extra help for visitors who want it, alongside fixing the site.

  1. Fix the source first

    Work through the WCAG 2.2 checklist: alt text, captions, labels, keyboard access, focus and contrast in your own markup.

  2. Describe the menu honestly

    In your accessibility statement, call it optional display settings that do not change your conformance status. The statement generator writes that paragraph for you.

  3. Give people a way to report barriers

    A support ticket form in the same widget gives each report a reference and a status, so you can fix what visitors find.

  4. Selling in the EU?

    Check whether the Act covers you in the European Accessibility Act guide.

What this menu is
Builderify accessibility module
Category
Visitor-controlled toolbar
Tools
13, in 5 groups
Changes your markup
No
Writes alt text or captions
No
Repairs labels or keyboard access
No
Detects screen readers
No
Remembers choices
In the visitor’s browser, for your site
Claims to make you compliant
Never

Five tools have Alt keyboard shortcuts. Like any floating button, check the launcher does not cover focused elements on your pages (WCAG 2.4.11).

10 credits
per 1,000 page loads with the widget on them
250 free
credits every month, with no monthly fee
$9
one-time packs from, and credits never expire

The accessibility menu is included in every account and ships in the same script tag as the other 20 modules. The full rate card is on the pricing page.

Start free
Questions

Accessibility overlays, before you ask.

No. An overlay is a script that runs in the visitor's browser and can change how a page looks for the person who switches it on, but WCAG conformance means the page itself meets every success criterion. Missing alt text, captions, form labels and keyboard access sit in your own markup and content, which a toolbar does not fix.

In January 2025 the FTC alleged that accessiBe misrepresented its accessWidget as able to make any website WCAG-compliant, and that it presented paid reviews as independent. The final order, issued on 21 April 2025 and announced the next day, requires a $1 million payment and bars those claims unless they are backed by competent and reliable evidence. accessiBe neither admitted nor denied the allegations.

Yes. Nothing in the ADA, the FTC Act or the European Accessibility Act forbids putting a toolbar on your site. What those laws look at is whether the site itself is accessible and whether claims about it are true, so a badge saying a widget makes you compliant is the risky part.

Yes. UsableNet's 2025 year-end report counted lawsuits filed that year against companies whose sites already had a widget installed. That shows a widget was present, not that it caused the suit, but no tool can promise legal protection.

No, and Builderify does not claim that it does. It is a visitor-controlled menu of 13 display and reading tools, the same category as the toolbars in the FTC case, and it does not change your markup. Use it as extra help for visitors alongside fixing the site, and describe it as optional in your accessibility statement.

Sources

All sources checked on 5 October 2026. ← All guides

Stop losing the visitors
you already paid for.

More leads from the traffic you already have, and follow-up that sends itself. Free to start. No card, no monthly fee.

Start free See what it does