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.
For people who are blind, text-to-speech is THE ONLY WAY to read books on Kindle, whether they like the voice quality or not. If the function is disabled, the Authors are limiting their audience. The quality of the speech is not comparable to the professional actors' voices used in audio books, so the idea that it is against the law to read their books with the synthesizer is absurd. Not to mention the fact that we have a choice between buying the Kindle book (which costs about $10) and the audio book (about $30). Why not give the same choices to those who can't see?
This is what gets me about computer companies. They can design software and/or technology that ultimately allows others to break copy right laws and complain as they do it. Try to put a copy of a software on one too many computers and look out. Do not break that license. Use our software, share a song, book, etc., just don't share our software.
Once again, technology for good of human kind challenged by greediness.
Frankly, in the United States, where most of the nation's children are only semi-literate and few have been directed to the joy of immersing oneself in a good book, I think book authors should be thrilled that Amazon is trying new ways to create a book-oriented audience that usually is found ensconced before a mind-numbing television screen. Authors--don't be so greedy! Most of you aren't that talented anyway. And, you don't have to worry until Amazon's "speech robot" loses its "garbling in the shower" voice.
The guild just found one more little thing to stick it to us consumers and just watch... some inept, technology challenged judge will preside over this and side with the guild. The kindles feature in no way infringes on their copyrights since it just converts the text to speech without saving it.
It should not be considered illegal since technology is always changing and no one should be able to hold us back, the audio books are behind times really and had their good times already and they still will be purchased by some who do not have or can not afford Kindle, etc. This is not the same as pirating/copying by any means since the software itself appears to read it to you from the text, same as if you are to read out loud and I am quite sure that is legal, otherwise every teacher and parent is a criminal!
I already have the first kindle...I just recently ordered my hubby the K2 - it is supposed to ship later this month or early March... We actually would have preferred the K1, but in reading on-line at amazon, people who have been on the wait list for a K1 since December were recently emailed by amazon saying they would get a K2... So this feature is in no way why we're getting it, but it could be a nice feature as we grow old and our eyesight worsens. Be nice not to have to repurchase books to listen to or purchase a different system. Now my worry: Is it now going to be held hostage by some court injunction until this matter is settled?
Hmmm.... A robot voice vs. a human voice that fits the book at hand. Listen, an audio book is an experience of relaxation an deep imagination. Having a robot voice read to me would destroy both of those pleasures. There is no way on the face of this earth that this "text to speech" feature will turn book lovers from audio books.
You people really should get a life. Think about, maybe, stingrays dying on the Great Barrier Reef. Red-legged frogs being pushed out of housing developments. Space junk orbiting the planet. Are you kidding me? Upset at an auto-translate program? You are absolutely, positively stupid.
So you have to buy software and the book. Since it does not store the book it actually is better than someone reading it and telling from memery leter!!
My free adobe PDF reader can actually convert text to speach too, yet it does not have an "extra cost".
@#23 (iridium190): Not a bad compromise for sighted people, but how would you keep the market for sighted and non-sighted separate (i.e., keeping non-sighted people from selling their devices and/or content on eBay for less than the sighted rate)? Besides, text-to-speech already exists on Windows and Mac OS X. It may be intended for the visually disabled but anybody is allowed to use it.
Digital book makers will start using custom fonts that have a scrambled indexing system embedded in such a way that the TTS feature tries to read the text that it only will give you instructions on how to purchase a licensed audio version over and over. HaHa!!!
There's nothing worng with these copyright pigs that a MP-40 and a few grenades wouldn't solve.
I listen to all books via a text to speech system and love it. It is much easier to understand that audio books recorded by a human narrator. I tried few audiobooks in the past and threw them away. But computer generated speech is wonderful. I read hundreds books this way. I hope Kindle keeps this feature.
Who the heck should even care! This world is all about sue, sue, and more suing... Ugh! Give me a break!
I wonder if the Kindle could put Morgan Freeman's voice on their text-to-speech conversion? That would be pretty cool! As for the Authors Guild, they are idiots and the law is likely on the side of the Kindle for the reasons many people have stated, that there is no audio version stored and this is similar to having someone read a printed book out loud. here is a good analysis: http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1988
If I read a book out loud to my children, is that against the law? And what's more, having a GPS voice from a kindle read to you is not the same as a quality professionally done audio book. I think that the visually impaired will prefer the audio book first, then possibly go to the kindle if something isn't available, or is only available in an abridged format.
how is this any different than the text to voice option on all computers you can download a book and turn on the text to voice option and just listen if kindle is outlawed then all computers will have to be recalled to have this function disabled it would be cost prohibitive
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
66 Posted by youngbce on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:57PM EDT Report Abuse
The excuse --"I won't make as much money."-- should not be a legal argument. Some of the best technology is hindered by "analogs" trying to keep their product marketable. VIVA LA REVOLUCION