[blindlaw] FW: Cory Doctorow: Authors have lost the plot in Kindle battle

[E.J. Zufelt]

Good afternoon,


On 1-Apr-09, at 7:21 AM, Chris Danielsen wrote:

Cory Doctorow, The Guardian March 31, 2009

> 1. It's not an infringement for a Kindle owner to use technology
> privately to modify a copyrighted work.

If this is true, it does not answer the question of whether a  
copyright owner is required to make the work available in a format  
that is susceptible to modification.

But ultimately, the legality of the feature is irrelevant - as is the
nonsensical discussion about whether the Kindle's text-to-speech is
(or will someday be) as good as a commercial, human-generated
audiobook (the answers being, "No," and "The day that artificial
intelligence gives us perfect Kindle readings, we'll have bigger fish
to fry than audiobook rights").

The reason it's irrelevant is that Amazon wants to get licenses from
members of the Authors Guild in order to sell their books in the
Kindle store.

I do not see how the legality of licensing schemes is irrelevant.   
Yes, amazon wants to protect its interests and they do this by trying  
to find a balance that will provide them with the most products to  
sell to the most number of customers.  If the answer to the legal  
question is that authors and distributors of electronic works cannot  
prevent their modification, then Amazon does not have to worry about  
arguing with the copyright holders, although some copyright holders  
may still choose not to sell their works through Amazon.  If the  
answer is that authors and distributors may restrict the modification  
of electronic works then Amazon will need to make a decision regarding  
whether allowing authors to license their works in this fashion will  
provide them with the greatest return on investment.

Thanks,
Everett