Legal ruckus over Kindle 2's text-to-speech feature

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.

Comments on Legal ruckus over Kindle 2's text-to-speech feature

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 1 Posted by cjubitz on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:26PM EDT Report Abuse

    How is this different from employing read-aloud software (e.g., Kurzweil) for people who are blind and visually impaired? Why is Kurzweil allowed to do this and not Kindle? If Kindle is allowed to go forward with its text-to-speech function, this will be a breakthrough for blind and visually impaired readers. It will suddenly make available to them hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of books that were previously off limits or only available in abridged form. This would be an incredible accessibility tool for them.

  • 2 Posted by wplj42 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:49PM EDT Report Abuse

    I think the text to speech idea is wonderful. If speech were enabled for controls of the device as well, then it could become a wonderful device for the blind and visually impaired!

  • 3 Posted by perio77 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:06PM EDT Report Abuse

    Laws are sometimes ridiculous.

  • 4 Posted by sun_octavian on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:48PM EDT Report Abuse

    I think I can see how this is against the law in that the book or whatever is being spoken by the Kindle, and then becomes an audio version of the book or document thereby enforcing the need of copyright and royalty or additional payments to the authors. It's like reading the lyrics of a song, then having an amateur band perform and record it and give it to such-and-such without paying the royalties to the band that made the song. It may look like the authors are greedy but they are not.

  • 5 Posted by rcrumbzap on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:32PM EDT Report Abuse

    The authors shouldn't be concerned with the text to speech function eating into audio book sales. Can you imagine anyone sitting through a book read by a computerized voice? I can't stand one minute of computerized voicemail heck on the phone. An entire book read by a GPS voice would drive me insane

  • 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...

  • 7 Posted by matthew.raymond on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:11PM EDT Report Abuse

    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.

  • 8 Posted by satchmothegreat on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:06PM EDT Report Abuse

    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.

  • 9 Posted by bowling4fudge on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:11PM EDT Report Abuse

    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.

  • 10 Posted by ricopeep on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:40PM EDT Report Abuse

    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.

More Posts: First Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Post a Comment