[Dtb-talk] NLS and copyright

[T. Joseph Carter]

... You can copy the digital format in real time.  People have been 
doing so, and the quality is much better than the typical cassette 
based digitized version in that since the files would tend to be too 
big otherwise, they tend to get cut by chapter for reasonable file 
sizes when distributing.

While I don't participate in Copyright infringement, you may not want 
to ask how I know so much about these things.

-- 
How many children in America are not taught how to read?
If they are blind, the answer is 90%--more than 52,000 children!
Find out how you can help: http://www.braille.org/


On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 01:46:43AM -0500, Grover Zinn wrote:
>
>In response to Kurt, let me make clear I don't have a problem with 
>the NLS setting restrictions on the material that they provide (free, 
>it must be remembered) for the blind.  That has been an unbelievable 
>good for blind and disabled people.  However, it is a bit of a puzzle 
>(other than for the usual political/economic reasons mentioned 
>earlier in this thread) why the introduction of digital format also 
>introduced the need for a key.  The "old" 4 track cassette tapes 
>could be copied (in real time, i.e. slowly) whereas the digital 
>format is "locked" if you don't have the key.
>
>From a purely copyright perspective, everyone has the right to one 
>copy for personal use of any copyrighted work. (NOTE: The "public 
>performance right"---i.e. play a musical score, perform a play, or 
>show a DVD in a public venue, i.e. outside your home, is different 
>from copyright issues; same for CDs in public "performance" uses).  
>The Digital Millenium copyright law in the US does say that changing 
>the format of a work is not legal (I believe I have that right; 
>relying on memory), but the question is: are you changing the 
>"format" in a narrow sense when a device reads an electronic text; 
>the text remains the same, IMHO.
>
>Interesting to realize that the situation in other countries is far 
>different from what is true in the US, particularly the Australian 
>situation of the illegality of hindering accessibility.  Barnes and 
>Noble sounds like a typical protective corporate knee-jerk reaction.
>
>Thanks  to Dave Kearny for such an excellent summation of the 
>international situation and the details of the NLS Daisy book 
>encoding.  (I know much more now!)  Looks like the US is unique in a 
>way that is not helpful for the blind---while other countries take a 
>different approach.  One fascinating (discouraging?) point in all of 
>this from the viewpoint of the author (a diversion from our topic) is 
>that publishers now want a copyright that gives them the right to use 
>the text of an article or book in any other project, format, etc. and 
>in fragmentary form. In a recent project, several of us just trashed 
>the contract letter (on the advice of a lawyer) and wrote that we 
>gave the publisher a one-time right to use the material in the 
>specified book.  Not a peep back from them.
>
>To me, it seems that the ebook folks are just wandering down a road a 
>little bit like the music industry---but the numbers of people 
>affected are very small.  Very small, that is, until all those iPod 
>Touch and iPhone folks realize that the device really could read 
>ebooks to them, if the DRM were removed.   (If you think I'm in favor 
>of breaking copyright, you are wrong; as Assoc. Dean I shut down 
>coursepacks, dealt with infringement of public performance rights, 
>worked on better knowledge by all of copyright laws (it also protects 
>authors in my college!!)----and on the other hand,  participated in 
>the development of a library policy that allows extensive access to 
>electronic copies of materials for specific courses by people in 
>those courses.)
>
>Non-talking ebooks restrict accessibility for blind and disabled 
>people (I know I'm preaching to the choir.)  Unfortunately, the ebook 
>publishers in the US appear to  see a "talking ebook" eating away at 
>the audio book market----but then I suspect there will always be a 
>market for books read by human voices rather than the synthesized 
>voices reading text (although the latter are getting better).  It 
>isn't primarily a case of "free" vs "paid" (NLS covers the "free" 
>aspect for the books that they make available---a rather odd 
>assortment in some ways; but the books are there; the "paid" would be 
>the ebook marketers like Barnes and Noble, et al)
>
>The NFB has done a good deed by putting pressure on Amazon re: the 
>Kindle.  But pressure needs to be on the ebook market also!  
>(Colleges and Universities have a huge struggle getting books into 
>readable form for blind students, given resources, copyright, and 
>other details.  Now, I believe they are able to cooperate between 
>institutions.  Judging from recent responses to an educational blog 
>on the Arizona State situation, most students and citizens (limited 
>sample) think making materials available and accessible to the blind 
>and others is a snap and no problem and that people who think there 
>is a problem should just go away!!  :-(
>
>Well, enough said for now.  Need to get back to working on my current 
>project that will be copyrighted (i.e. a translation from the Latin; 
>and not likely to be an audio book, but perhaps an etext  :-)    )
>
>best to all,
>
>Grover Zinn
>
>
>
>
>Grover Zinn
>William H. Danforth Professor of Religion, emeritus
>former Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
>Oberlin College
>Oberlin, OH 44074
>grover.zinn at oberlin.edu
>
>
>
>On Dec 12, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Kurt Edwin Yount wrote:
>
>>It should be noted that without the copyright that NLS used none of 
>>these
>>books that we remember would have been recorded because as the program
>>was originallly imagined it was only meant for the blind, although 
>>it ran
>>the gambit from 33/1/3 to cassettes.  If you remember those days 
>>when it
>>said solely for the use of the blind it was always like that.  I
>>understand how people outside the US would not want DRM protection, 
>>but I
>>also understand that it is an extremely valuable resource for those 
>>who
>>for years had little to read except braille.  I still treasure it, 
>>even
>>as I am sad that others outside the US cannot have access.  
>>Remember also
>>that RNIB in England and I forget the one in Canada, CNIB I think also
>>had restriction on borrowing previliges and still do.  Kurt
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Dtb-talk mailing list
>>Dtb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/dtb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>for Dtb-talk:
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/dtb-talk_nfbnet.org/grover.zinn%40oberlin.edu
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Dtb-talk mailing list
>Dtb-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/dtb-talk_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Dtb-talk:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/dtb-talk_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph%40gmail.com