Thu Feb 12, 2009 1:17PM EST
See Comments (1034)
It was hardly the most interesting or earth-shaking part of Jeff Bezos's introduction of the Kindle 2 on Monday, but one small, experimental feature in the device is already causing a minor uproar. Specifically: The Kindle 2's text-to-speech function, which will use a computerized voice to read aloud anything displayed on the device's screen. The problem? The Authors Guild says that that's against the law.
The challenge revolves around audiobooks, which are treated separately from printed material from a copyright standpoint. A retailer can't record a copy of a book on a CD and sell it or bundle it along with a novel without paying a separate fee, just as buying a copy of an audiobook doesn't entitle you to a free copy of the printed version.
Amazon -- and many legal observers -- vehemently question this stance, noting that an automated text-to-speech system isn't the same as a pre-recorded audio book. Some have even compared computerized speech systems like these to reading a children's storybook aloud at bedtime. Since the Kindle doesn't store a copy of the book on the device in an audio format, but rather converts from text on the fly, it seems likely that Amazon is on the right side of the law on this one.
Still, we're in a legal gray area that hasn't really been tested in court, and if our legal history has taught us anything, it's that judges can sway either way on these issues. If the Kindle 2's audio quality is good enough, it could eat substantially into the sales of audiobooks, and that alone tends to be a persuasive argument in the courtroom.
The Authors Guild doesn't seem ready to go to court yet, however. In a memo the organization sent to its membership this morning it said publishers and authors should "consider asking Amazon to disable the audio function on e-books it licenses." Get ready for a long road ahead on this one.
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
Similar printed text-to-speech devices are used every day by persons with visual impairments. Only a small number of the total books printed each year are published as audio boobs--the disabling of the feature would make these print materials now inaccessible to this population on the Kindle 2.
What about the angle that it provides a necessary service for the visually impaired? Doesn't this allow them the freedom to "read" books without braille? Amazon should use the Americans with Disabilities Act as part of its argument.
That is utter B.S. on the part of the Author's Guild. Not all books are on tape & if I want to listen to a book that is in print on my Kindle why shouldn't I? Don't I have the right to access, or use, material I've bought in any way I care too? If I buy a book & I have a device that can read it to me then I will use that device. I prefer Zombies & Sci-fi books & trust me, not much is on tape. So if I can buy a kindle book that interests me & it can be read to me I shall do so.
My husband is blind and this would be a wonderful thing for him. This is like the staircase union saying we shouldn't be allowed to have wheelchair ramps.
A computerized speech system on the Kindle is a Godsend to the blind. Now they can purchase and hear new bestsellers. Hooray! A synthesized voice is nothing that sighted people really want to listen to, so it's a big flap over nothing. Unless the Author's Guild is concerned that Kindle's audio function is setting a precedent.
total bullsh!t... you can open any Adobe text doc and use the text to speech option... just another industry looking for more consumer $dollars$ which will limit learning for visually impaired individuals and create more copyright nonsense to make attorneys rich...
yay
I agree with rcrumbzap - to compare the quality of a computerized voice to that of a narrator reading an audio book is silly. The Kindle sounds much more utilitarian.
how will this affect the blind? don't they have devices that read text aloud? I think the authors should be more flexible with this kind of technology - with this device, not only could reading be more portable, but with sound you could share with a friend or a child or listen while you drive or workout. If sales are going to increase in their profession, this is the kind of thing that needs to happen. "Sounds" great...
Sounds to me as though the Author's Guild is treading very thin on the Americans with Disabilities Act when they say it is illegal to record a written word. According to this act, it would be illegal not to be able to record books as it would violate the ADA. It sounds to be that the Author's Guild needs to do their homework with regard to the ADA.
Money Money Money Money. In case you didn't recognize it...these words are also song lyrics...Hmmmmm :)
greed killed the music business. greed will kill the dead tree business.
hello. Acrobat pro has had a read alound function for quite some time.
So does this mean that Adobe can no longer have its read-aloud feature? People who buy audiobooks sometimes buy them to listen to them in the car while they drive. I don't see people using this device while driving - do you???
It is a new technology... when cd's were invented, did audiotape makers lawyer up to protect their market share? In any case it will not replace audiobooks, which are a popular hands-free option for many people while they drive, work around the house, etc.
As a father of a dyslexic child I have been waiting for the Kindle II, already put my order in. It would be a powerful tool not only for visually impaired but also a learning tool for dyslexia. The comperterized voice is nothing like the prerecorded books. Seeing the words and hearing them at the same time is a powerful learning aid. It takes a greed inspired self centered maniac to block this powerful tool for the disabled.
Isn't there a simple compromise available? You buy a book that is either audio-enabled or not. If it is audio-enabled, you pay slightly more in royalties. The visually impaired can arrange a different purchase agreement.
I think this is a wonderful idea and a step out of the dark ages, not only for blind and visually impaired, but for students who suffer from reading disabilities. I can see this being used as a tool for re-enforcement in the class room and at home. Good for Kindle! May the courts, if it gets to that, consider the plight of many a child and adult who cannot fully enjoy the wonderful books out there because of the numerous and various disabilities.
I think that having a computer-voice read a book would be annoying, and even painful. More power to the folks who would enjoy it. Since the speech is not recorded or stored anywhere, wouldn't the Kindle text-to-speech be akin to the lady reading books at storyhour at the library?? How about the lady who reads books to kids at Barnes & Noble?? Should they have to pay a royalty fee, too?
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 Posted by cessnamichael on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:21PM EDT Report Abuse
Amazon is in the right on this one....But it's nice to see the Guild not acting like the RIAA out of the gate...