In the article by the NY Times, I think the statement made by Roy Blount, Jr., president of the Author's Guild, "that authors have a right to a fair share of the value that audio adds to Kindle 2’s version of books" is just another example of yet another way to initiate a frivolous lawsuit. Amazon is merely integrating new technology into a device that is helpful for people and it has nothing to do with the intellectual property. None of the work is being affected. No words are being changed, and the story lines are still intact.
I agree more with Wendy Seltzer, in the Wired article by David Kravetz who said "no rights are being violated. Amazon’s newest
gadget, she said, "is enabling another feature to make further lawful uses of
that book." I further agree that it is yet another step in making written materials more accessible to the blind and visually impaired.
More recently, in a lawsuit that was won by the HathiTrust digitization project, accessibilty appears to be the key point. “For the first time ever, blind students and scholars will have the opportunity
to participate equally in library research,” NFB president Marc Maurer said.
“The blind, just like the sighted, will have a world of education and
information at their fingertips." The article I read about this is located HERE.
Not only is nothing being changed in the text-to-speech function, Amazon isn't selling the books for more because of it. Amazon intergrades the e-book itself and the text-to-speech function for no extra cost. What's so wrong with having the Kindle read the book too you? Is the way I will read it in my head any different than what will be spoken to me? No, the book stays the same, no matter who (or what)reads it. I agrew with you when you said this is "just another example of yet another way to initiate a frivolous lawsuit" It truly is frivoulous and pointless.
ReplyDelete