[blindlaw] National Federation of the Blind Responds to Authors Guild Statement on the Amazon Kindle 2

Sat Feb 14 00:12:41 UTC 2009

Where I think your logic breaks down a little is when texts are readily availlable for purchase in electronic format which is 
what I understand is the case with these Amazon books but are not accessible to us.  There may come a day when a 
text-to-speech engine is as good as a human reader, but I have yet to see one that can really compete with 
commercially produced audio books.  Perhaps the Author's Guild is thinking ahead to the day when that will happen and 
in that sense, I can understand their position.  On the other hand, there is a practical side of all this that is not being 
considered.  Is it right to allow the print to be made easier to read through an electronic device that can enhance the 
contrast or enlarge the print but not to speak it, or is the Author's Guild contending that to alter the pring in any way is a 
violation of their copyright?  Certainly I can see some of the concerns of the Author's Guild, but I also see their position 
as not being in touch with reality in some ways as well.  If someone marked up the text to force characters to be spoken 
in different voices, for example, I could better understand their objection.  The best approach, to me, though, is to try to 
work toward a reasoned solution that takes into account the fact that there are some fuzzy lines, and that they should 
be worrying about the more obvious lines.  Why not try to work out a standard that limits the quality of the text-to-speech 
voices used, for example.  For us, the problem is simply that if we could get access to a book using technology that is 
aimed, at least sort of, at the mainstream, we'll get it faster and more quickly.  We will also be more likely to pay for the 
book.  We also have the current move toward the provision of college textbooks to all students, and this would reduce 
the enthusiasm that might otherwise be displayed to make such books accessible using the software required to read 
the books.  Publishers have been helpful in getting us electronic copies of textbooks, but I would not say that they have 
always bent over backwards to do it, and I suspect that the passage and threat of passage of certain laws has probably 
forced some degree of cooperation.  

In short, I do understand the concern that author's might have, but I also feel this is the typical response that is always 
looking back instead of ahead.  After all, music on cassettes meant the end of commercial music, and we should have 
stayed with records.  The line between print and text-to-speech has long been growing finer with text-to-speech being 
added to software for the benefit of sighted persons as well as the blind.  It is a part of Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft Office, 
and OmniPage just for text reading and not specifically for accessibility.  These rendoring are not the same as a 
commercial audio recording read by someone who usually has a professional acting background.

Best regards,

Steve Jacobson

On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:58:52 -0400, E.J. Zufelt wrote:

>Good morning,

>I think that is reasonable for an author to be able to treat the right  
>to a printed version of their work separately than the rights to an  
>audio version of their work.  However, it is also reasonable that  
>visually impaired readers, or any otherwise textually impaired  
>readers, be able to access a copy of the work in an accessible format.

>I don't think that these two propositions are in conflict with each  
>other.  When I was in school publishers would send me digital copies  
>of their texts, while my classmates had to work with printed  
>versions.  If I were to share the digital copy with a student who had  
>purchased the printed version I would be violating copyright, as I was  
>granted a license to use the digital copy myself, and not to share it  
>with outhers.

>Everett

>On 13-Feb-09, at 9:54 AM, Locke Milholland wrote:

>> * Moving your lips while reading in front of someone who can read  
>> lips is therefore a copyright violation.
>> * allowing someone to read over your shoulder is a copyright  
>> violation.
>> *Sitting on the beach and reading with reflective mirrored  
>> sunglasses is a copyright violation.
>> *remembering what you read, is a copyright violation, if over 100  
>> words and/or not properly cited.
>>
>> Future litigation:
>> Timex v. guy who answered when asked for the time.
>> Rand Mcnally v. guy who gave directions
>> MLB v. guy who told his friend the score without the expressed  
>> written consent of Major League Baseball and its affiliates
>>
>> Common sense v. copyright holders.
>> Locke
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Freeh,Jessica (by way of David Andrews <dandrews at visi.com>)" <JFreeh at nfb.org 
>> >
>> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 10:38 PM
>> To: <david.andrews at nfbnet.org>
>> Subject: [blindlaw] National Federation of the Blind Responds to  
>> Authors Guild Statement on the Amazon Kindle 2
>>
>>> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>>>
>>> CONTACT:
>>> Chris Danielsen
>>> Director of Public Relations
>>> National Federation of the Blind
>>> (410) 659-9314, extension 2330
>>> (410) 262-1281 (Cell)
>>> <mailto:cdanielsen at nfb.org>cdanielsen at nfb.org
>>>
>>> National Federation of the Blind Responds to Authors Guild
>>> Statement on the Amazon Kindle 2
>>>
>>> Baltimore, Maryland (February 12, 2009): The National Federation of  
>>> the Blind, the largest organization of blind people in the United  
>>> States, today responded to a statement put out by the Authors Guild  
>>> advising its members to consider negotiating contracts prohibiting  
>>> e-books to be read aloud by the new Amazon Kindle 2, which  
>>> incorporates text-to-speech technology. The Authors Guild argues  
>>> that the reading of a book out loud by a machine is a copyright  
>>> infringement unless the copyright holder has specifically granted  
>>> permission for the book to be read aloud.
>>>
>>> Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind,  
>>> said: "The National Federation of the Blind supports all  
>>> technologies that allow blind people to have better access to the  
>>> printed word, including the ability of devices like the Kindle 2 to  
>>> read commercial e-books aloud using text-to-speech technology.  
>>> Although the Authors Guild claims that it supports making books  
>>> accessible to the blind, its position on the inclusion of text-to- 
>>> speech technology in the Kindle 2 is harmful to blind people. The  
>>> Authors Guild says that having a book read aloud by a machine in  
>>> the privacy of one's home or vehicle is a copyright infringement.  
>>> But blind people routinely use readers, either human or machine, to  
>>> access books that are not available in alternative formats like  
>>> Braille or audio. Up until now, no one has argued that this is  
>>> illegal, but now the Authors Guild says that it is. This is  
>>> absolutely wrong. The blind and other readers have the right for  
>>> books to be presented to us in the format that is most useful to  
>>> us, and we are not violating copyright law as long as we use  
>>> readers, either human or machine, for private rather than public  
>>> listening. The key point is that reading aloud in private is the  
>>> same whether done by a person or a machine, and reading aloud in  
>>> private is never an infringement of copyright.
>>>
>>> "Amazon has taken a step in the right direction by including text- 
>>> to-speech technology for reading e-books aloud on its new Kindle  
>>> 2," Dr. Maurer continued. "We note, however, that the device itself  
>>> cannot be used independently by a blind reader because the controls  
>>> to download a book and begin reading it aloud are visual and  
>>> therefore inaccessible to the blind. We urge Amazon to rectify this  
>>> situation as soon as possible in order to make the Kindle 2 a  
>>> device that truly can be used both by blind and sighted readers. By  
>>> doing so, Amazon will make it possible for blind people to purchase  
>>> a new book and begin reading it immediately, just as sighted people  
>>> do."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ###
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> About the National Federation of the Blind
>>>
>>> With more than 50,000 members, the National Federation of the Blind  
>>> is the largest and most influential membership organization of  
>>> blind people in the United States. The NFB improves blind people's  
>>> lives through advocacy, education, research, technology, and  
>>> programs encouraging independence and self-confidence. It is the  
>>> leading force in the blindness field today and the voice of the  
>>> nation's blind. In January 2004 the NFB opened the National  
>>> Federation of the Blind Jernigan Institute, the first research and  
>>> training center in the United States for the blind led by the blind.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info  
>>> for blindlaw:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotmail.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info  
>> for blindlaw:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/everett%40zufelt.ca

>_______________________________________________
>blindlaw mailing list
>blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com