Cherie
Status: Lewis Carroll
 Offline
Cape Cod
Posts: 137
|
 |
« on: February 10, 2009, 09:58:08 AM » |
|
A writer friend (non-Kindler) just passed this along:
From a publishing industry newsletter, a couple of things on the new Kindle.
"Some in the publishing community are raising objections to the new device's deployment of text-to-speech software that lets users have books read aloud by Kindle. Agents are raising questions and Authors Guild executive director Paul Aiken tells the WSJ "they don't have the right to read a book out loud. That's an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law." Amazon spokesman Drew Herdener says "these are not audiobooks. Text to speech is simply software that runs on devices and reads content." To that argument, an agent responds to us: "TTS is a tool. So is a knife. If I use it to cut vegetables, I'm using it for its intended and lawful purpose. If I use it to stab someone, I'm committing a crime. The fact that they are using a technology to create an audiobook rather than recording one has nothing to do with the issue. They are using a tool that has lawful purposes to violate copyright." Asked about next steps, Aiken says "we're studying it right now."
"One other feature of the new Kindle not mentioned earlier is that the battery--prone to exposure when the back door would fly off in the first model--is now sealed inside the device. An Amazon representative told us that they heard from very few customers who had need or interest in replacing the battery on the device. (And the loose door was a commonly-heard complaint.)"
My comments on these points: the battery part doesn't make sense. Maybe the reporter misunderstood the Amazon rep. With demand for K1 batteries so high they've been on backorder for months, clearly it's not true that "they heard from very few customers who had need or interest in replacing the battery."
The other issue, though--that the Text-to-Speech feature might infringe audio book rights--sounds like a potential minefield for Amazon. Presumably their legal staff gave them the go-ahead. Or did anyone think to ask them about it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
mwb
Status: Lewis Carroll
Offline
Gender: 
Boston, MA
Posts: 220
Zarth Arn (Star Crash) - Evil Overlording in Style
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2009, 10:03:36 AM » |
|
"they don't have the right to read a book out loud. That's an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law." I look forward with great amusement to their impending RIAA style lawsuits against parents reading aloud to their children all of whom failed to secure those rights to read a book aloud. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
- Michael
|
|
|
|
kim
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2009, 10:06:40 AM » |
|
So much in this world is just ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dangerosa
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2009, 10:07:43 AM » |
|
"TTS is a tool."
It's not the only tool in that article. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mikuto
Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
Offline
Gender: 
Foster City, CA
Posts: 788
One can never be too well-read.
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2009, 10:12:51 AM » |
|
Is the genius who wrote that article going to prosecute ALL text to speech programs? Because the one on the Kindle 2 certainly isn't the first.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Not once in my life has my train of thought taken a straight path between point A and point B without stopping to visit Y and F along the way.
|
|
|
|
kim
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2009, 10:18:29 AM » |
|
It's not the only tool in that article.
LOL, good one! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
intinst
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2009, 10:21:05 AM » |
|
Is the genius who wrote that article going to prosecute ALL text to speech programs? Because the one on the Kindle 2 certainly isn't the first.
Probably just the ones with multi-millions. ie:Amazon |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A great many people now reading and writing would be better employed keeping rabbits. Edith Sitwell  Located just outside Little Rock, Arkansas Goal for 2012 = 100 books read, read so far = 60 Now reading = Maggie Get Your Gun - Kate Danley |
|
|
|
ProfCrash
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2009, 10:26:36 AM » |
|
What a bunch of twits. Maybe if audio books were not so d*mn expensive this wouldn't be a problem. I seriously doubt that Amazon would put something on the K2 that was illegal. I have a sneaking suspicion that their lawyers got all of their ducks in order before allowing text to speech to be added to K2.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
pidgeon92
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2009, 10:30:22 AM » |
|
Did he really compare text-to-speech to murder?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
  my e-readers: Kindle 2 • Kindle 3 • nook • iPad • Sony-950 |
|
|
Mikuto
Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
Offline
Gender:
Foster City, CA
Posts: 788
One can never be too well-read.
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2009, 10:33:17 AM » |
|
A lot of blind people use text to speech for computers. Googling text to speech brings up 33,000,000 sites. Plenty of them offering programs. This is a non-issue. There is no legality issue here. Authors Guild executive director Paul Aiken tells the WSJ "they don't have the right to read a book out loud. That's an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law."
If that was true, every single person who ever read a book to their child, or read a piece aloud to a friend, or read something aloud in school is BREAKING COPYRIGHT LAW. The level of ridiculous here can't even be measured. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Not once in my life has my train of thought taken a straight path between point A and point B without stopping to visit Y and F along the way.
|
|
|
|
Jeff
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2009, 10:58:59 AM » |
|
Microsoft has been offering text to speech in their ebook reader for years.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ak rain
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2009, 11:11:11 AM » |
|
If that was true, every single person who ever read a book to their child, or read a piece aloud to a friend, or read something aloud in school is BREAKING COPYRIGHT LAW. The level of ridiculous here can't even be measured.
this was my thought too. also the sample text to speach sample I heard while OK is not the same as Brian Jacques reading Eulalia - a wonderfull performance and something to pay for. Sylvia |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The more you read, the more you know.
The more you know, the smarter you grow.
The smarter you grow, the stronger your voice.
when speaking your mind or making your choice.
|
|
|
|
Kind
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2009, 02:04:05 PM » |
|
So much in this world is just ridiculous. .gif) The "lawsuit industry" is a big business.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Kindleholic - Addicted since Summer 2008. Original Kindle x 2 Woot Woot |
|
|
|
robin.goodfellow
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 10, 2009, 02:50:01 PM » |
|
I look forward with great amusement to their impending RIAA style lawsuits against parents reading aloud to their children all of whom failed to secure those rights to read a book aloud. hahahahahaahahahahahahahahaahaha |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"One of the advantages of being disorganized is that one is always having surprising discoveries." — A.A. Milne "In a library we are surrounded by many hundreds of dear friends imprisoned by an enchanter in paper and leathern boxes." — Ralph Waldo Emerson   |
|
|
|
marianneg
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2009, 05:05:35 PM » |
|
It's not the only tool in that article.
ROFL And, on a serious note, I seriously doubt that this will stick, since amazon/Kindle is not keeping a recording of the TTS output, much less selling it as such. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Steph H
|
|
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2009, 05:09:32 PM » |
|
Agreed that the whole argument is stupid.
I did notice yesterday, though, that TTS is listed as "experimental", which means Amazon could take it away at any time for any reason, just like they did with NowNow....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
K3/Keyboard - Alexa (since June 2, 2011) (main Kindle, 4th)KFire - Firefly (since Dec. 20, 2011) Swag Bucks - Earn Amazon GCs for free! I'm in the fight! - Support Liver Disease Awareness |
|
|
|
chobitz
|
|
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2009, 05:13:34 PM » |
|
I can only imagine the lawsuit against the parents..
"So how many chapters of Harry Potter did you read to your 4 children?"
Its as stupid as disney suing daycares because they dare have Winnie The Pooh murals..
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 My best friend is a person who will get me a book I have not read - Abraham Lincoln |
|
|
Mikuto
Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
Offline
Gender:
Foster City, CA
Posts: 788
One can never be too well-read.
|
|
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2009, 05:16:24 PM » |
|
President Obama has read Harry Potter. One could infer that he's read it to his daughters.
Are they going to try and sue HIM?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Not once in my life has my train of thought taken a straight path between point A and point B without stopping to visit Y and F along the way.
|
|
|
Leslie
Member 24!
Global Moderator
Status: Agatha Christie
Offline
Gender:
Maine, USA
Posts: 16271
Monday and Dempsey in Maine!
|
|
« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2009, 05:17:50 PM » |
|
Agreed that the whole argument is stupid.
I did notice yesterday, though, that TTS is listed as "experimental", which means Amazon could take it away at any time for any reason, just like they did with NowNow....
Only if people insist on having their Kindle read stupid books to them... L |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 I'm just a lonesome cowboy...missing my own true love.  |
|
|
VMars
Status: Lewis Carroll
Offline
Gender:
E.P. Texas
Posts: 206
|
|
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2009, 05:21:06 PM » |
|
This is ridiculous. If they get sued, then blind people should sue THEM (the RIAA) for denying them the ease of having thousand of books read out loud to them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bacardi Jim
|
|
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2009, 05:28:32 PM » |
|
Only if people insist on having their Kindle read stupid books to them...
L
I think you put the adjective in the wrong place.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
At first Ford had formed a theory to account for this strange behavior. If human beings don't keep exercising their lips, he thought, their mouths probably seize up.
After a few months' consideration and observation he abandoned this theory in favor of a new one. If they don't keep on exercising their lips, he thought, their brains start working.
|
|
|
|
SusanCassidy
|
|
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2009, 05:37:31 PM » |
|
Its as stupid as disney suing daycares because they dare have Winnie The Pooh murals..
Actually, that IS different, because Disney owns its version of Winnie the Pooh, just like it owns Mickey Mouse, and they have had piracy issues with rip-off products that aren't licensed to use Disney characters. I believe even the original Winnie-the-Pooh illustrations (which, personally, I greatly prefer) are copyrighted. If they don't protect their licensing, it will be just like Bayer lost the use of the word "aspirin", because they let people use it without trademarking. I know it sounds crazy, but when lawyers get involved on technicalities, craziness ensues (no pun intended). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
durphy
|
|
« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2009, 05:40:53 PM » |
|
Jonathan Zittrain, a professor at Harvard Law School, said he doesn't see how the feature violates copyright law if no recorded copy of the book is created. Book publishers often license audio books separately than the text versions. "The only right really that might be implicated is the so-called public performance," Zittrain said. "But what I want the thing to do is to read to me n the car. I don't see a copy being made so I don't see how this can be Amazon's problem." http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10161104-93.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 05:42:25 PM by durphy »
|
Logged
|
The cure for boredom is curiosity.
There is no cure for curiosity.
— Dorothy Parker
|
|
|
|
chobitz
|
|
« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2009, 05:42:26 PM » |
|
Actually, that IS different, because Disney owns its version of Winnie the Pooh, just like it owns Mickey Mouse, and they have had piracy issues with rip-off products that aren't licensed to use Disney characters. I believe even the original Winnie-the-Pooh illustrations (which, personally, I greatly prefer) are copyrighted. If they don't protect their licensing, it will be just like Bayer lost the use of the word "aspirin", because they let people use it without trademarking.
I know it sounds crazy, but when lawyers get involved on technicalities, craziness ensues (no pun intended).
Actually there IS a loophole with trademark names like Aspirin that if its used communally as a generic name for the pain pill over x amount of years they can't sue. Its more a society chosen thing. Thats why people use Kleenex for tissue for example. I use to know the blow by blow laws but its been a long time since I have been in an advertising/marketing class. I'm sorry but I still think its dumb when Disney sues a mom and pop daycare cause their 16 year old son drew a few Disney characters on their wall. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
My best friend is a person who will get me a book I have not read - Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
SusanCassidy
|
|
« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2009, 05:44:13 PM » |
|
That's what I mean. "Aspirin" started out as a brand name, and they lost their trademark because they let people use the name. You could be sued for using "kleenex" instead of tissue, since it is trademarked.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM
