# Kindle 2: Authors can restrict text to speech **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 28, 2009, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760 "2009-02-28T04:34:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/41 "2009-03-01T18:39:28Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > **handy** -he was banned for frequently giving out medical advice, even after being warned not to. Ah, yes. Handy. I enjoyed a lot of his posts, but it’s true that he didn’t seem to pay attention to warnings. Hi Handy, if you’re somewhere out there lurking. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![FilmGeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@FilmGeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FilmGeek)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/42 "2009-03-01T18:54:04Z")
For an example, Wil Wheaton did a reading of a passage from his own most recent book, and then had his computer read it out loud to compare the two. [http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2009/02/wil-wheaton-vs-text-2-speech.html](http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2009/02/wil-wheaton-vs-text-2-speech.html) ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/43 "2009-03-01T19:17:11Z")
Yes, the current technology is no real competition to a human storyteller. So? A few years from now the quality of the text to speech experience may be much better. But, from the publishers and artists POV, the precedence is being set now. By selling both the digital file that creates text and audio experiences of a book and the device that can read that file and create both of those book experiences, they are selling both a printed e-book and an audiobook. Yeah, maybe a crappy one, but so what? To say that are not selling the audiobook because it doesn’t exisit until the Kindle reads the file is disingenuous as the printed copy is also created by the Kindle by reading the files (and is also not exactly the same as the printed page). ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/44 "2009-03-01T19:29:09Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Yes, the current technology is no real competition to a human storyteller. So? A few years from now the quality of the text to speech experience may be much better. But, from the publishers and artists POV, the precedence is being set now. > > By selling both the digital file that creates text and audio experiences of a book and the device that can read that file and create both of those book experiences, they are selling both a printed e-book and an audiobook. Yeah, maybe a crappy one, but so what? > > To say that are not selling the audiobook because it doesn’t exisit until the Kindle reads the file is disingenuous as the printed copy is also created by the Kindle by reading the files (and is also not exactly the same as the printed page). So when my robotic reader hits the market (and remember it’s just scan + OCR added on to the text-to-speech; this is existing technology not scifi), selling printed works will be selling both print and audio versions? I would quite appreciate it if someone would address this point - that this mechanized text-to-speech could start with any form of text input, right down to Gutenberg’s first edition. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/45 "2009-03-01T20:09:35Z")
To some degree yes, and publishers would have to accept that as competition to audiobooks because there will be no way to not sell both at the same time. Crappy competition that is no real threat and has no potential to become real competition but competition nevertheless. The reader however would not be containing the audiobook, the book is when enabled by the reader. The critical differences being that Amazon is selling the file and the means to create both book formats from that file and it is easy to imagine fairly rapid improvements in text to speech that could compete with storyteller read audiobooks at least for the very price sensitive consumer. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/46 "2009-03-01T20:30:52Z")
If it’s easy, then it’s infringing, but if it’s hard then it’s not infringing? Look, I’m having a really hard time seeing how there is any consistent argument here beyond authors (quite naturally) wanting to maximize the revenues generated by their works. We have legitimately licensed distribution of text-format works. We have a machine that can take text content and read it aloud. What you and some others are arguing is that the existence of the machine makes it the case that distributing text-format content infringes on audio distribution rights. Whether the text-format content is electronic or paper really makes no difference beyond adding a layer of complexity to the machine. Whether the vendor of the machine is also the one selling the text-format content also makes no difference. If this were a Panasonic device reading ordinary .pdf format ebooks sold by Borders the legal situation would be absolutely no different than it is with Amazon selling both. The problem is that the logical conclusion of your argument is that given the existence of mechanical reading technology (and it does exist), selling printed books infringes on audio rights. This strikes me as a _reductio ad absurdum_. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/47 "2009-03-01T20:54:54Z")
This is really not a problem. There isn’t going to be a long term problem of disabled E-book readers. What’s going to happen is that E-book publishers are going to start negotiating for audiobook rights, and the royalties will get paid. This lawsuit is necessary just to establish that a text-to-speech reader does indeed infringe audiobook rights. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/48 "2009-03-01T21:01:01Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > To some degree yes, and publishers would have to accept that as competition to audiobooks because there will be no way to not sell both at the same time. Crappy competition that is no real threat and has no potential to become real competition but competition nevertheless. The reader however would not be containing the audiobook, the book is when enabled by the reader. The critical differences being that Amazon is selling the file and the means to create both book formats from that file and it is easy to imagine fairly rapid improvements in text to speech that could compete with storyteller read audiobooks at least for the very price sensitive consumer. On one hand I can see where you’re coming from and why it does work to the same results as distribution of an audio copy, but the thing is isn’t. It’s distribution of a text copy with the tools to read it to you. You’re the one that executes the tools. Text readers are fairly old technology. Windows come with it. There’s a bigger issue here. It’s who controls what you do with your electronic devices, and what you do with copies of things you get legally for your own personal use. What this, is a tool for people half a world a way to effectively cripple parts of your computer on a whim. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/49 "2009-03-01T21:16:53Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > Now imagine if you played your audiobook into your computer microphone while running a voice recognition program, and printed out the resulting text file. Well there’s nothing to imagine really - that technology already exists. The **legal** question is, have you created a derivative work by publishing it in a different format than that which you purchased it? (Remember, in copyright law, ‘publishing’ is any preparation of a work or creation. It doesn’t mean ‘made available for sale’ or even ‘made well-known publicly’.) Since creating derivative works is already covered by established law, it’s not unreasonable for the authors & publishers to say that their exisiting contracts for the sale of their work didn’t cover the possibility that Amazon’s device would allow for the creation of a derivative. It’s reasonable for them to want to reconsider their contracts in light of this newly available option for creating derivatives. It’s also the case, if I’m not mistaken, that if the publishers & authors don’t defend their right to make derivative copies they might one day find that the right has been eroded by general use. Legally, they have to pursue this matter if they want to be able to pursue defense of derivatives at a latter time. That’s why ascenray’s right - this is going to play out between publishers (including self-publishers) and Amazon (in their capacity as hardware providers.) Ultimately, this software option to read the text aloud will be enabled and the contracts between Amazon & publishers will be adjusted to account for the creation of this derivative work. (Also also, it’s possible that the courts will find that the Kindle’s reading aloud doesn’t constitute a derivative work. That would open a different kettle of fish. But I’m betting the matter gets settled privately long before that. It’s an interesting case and it has a lot of ramifications for future arguments about ‘what is a work’.) Most of what I know about the case comes from discussions in library school about works and copyright. Also, this article at Ars Technica has a great overview of the subject. > **[Kindles and "creative machines" blur boundaries of copyright](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/02/kindles-and-creative-machines-blur-boundaries-of-copyright/)** > > The Authors Guild has invited plenty of ridicule by claiming that Amazon's … ---
**Author:** ![Bootis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bootis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bootis)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/50 "2009-03-01T22:04:57Z")
I wonder if there are any statistics out there showing how frequently the purchaser of an ebook also purchases the same book as an audio book? If that number is negligable, then it seems like a pointless fight, since the point of it all seems to be, a customer shouldn’t be able to have both an ebook and an audio book for the price of one. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/51 "2009-03-01T23:44:58Z")
It occurs to me, what I’m trying to say, is that legally this isn’t about individual customers and what they do with their purchases. It’s about Amazon selling a device that provides text & audio editions, both, when what Amazon had contracted for with the publishers\*, was a device that provides text editions alone. The publishers (and again, this is self- and corporate-publishers) are saying, “hey - that’s not what we agreed to when we agreed to let you provide text editions on your Kindle device.” It’s a valid point, imo. It’s about contracts as much as about individual sales. (I mean, yeah, it’s about the money. But it’s also about ownership and contract rights.) \*Point of Order - not every book is available in a Kindle edition. Agreeing to publish in Kindle format is a separate arrangement publishers make with Amazon. There’s pros & cons to it, like any publishing arrangement. ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/52 "2009-03-01T23:49:19Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > Yes, I realize that Amazon is doing this voluntarily. This is hardly surprising given their relationship with publishers. > > But I don’t see why I have to get authors to agree with my plan in order to sell my robotic reader. Let’s suppose it has the dexterity to manually flip pages and read an ordinary printed book. I wouldn’t be selling any content, just the robot. It would take any book that you have (purchased, borrowed, whatever) and read it aloud. You would be responsible for obtaining legitimate copies of whatever it read. I wouldn’t need to obtain any permissions from anyone in order to market my device, nor would my device impinge on anyone’s rights to distribute audio versions of books. Or that is what I am arguing. > > That Amazon is the sole vendor of both the Kindle and the files it reads may be confusing the issue here. Oh, I see what you’re saying now. Sure, I’d say you could sell that robotic reader if it just read books that people already owned. But then again, I’m in favor of completely eliminating copyright. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/53 "2009-03-01T23:59:04Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > It’s about Amazon selling a device that provides text & audio editions, both Garden-variety personal computers have been able to convert from printed text to electronic text to audio, and from audio to electronic text to printed text, for several years. If this were just about a device which converts text to speech, Dell, HP, Microsoft, etc would have been subject to the wrath of the authors for years already. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/54 "2009-03-02T02:55:08Z")
Microsoft, Apple, HP et al do not have publishing contracts with their many random users and the random creators of the random materials they peruse. Amazon does have publishing contracts with the many authors & publishing house who agree to make their works available on Amazon’s Kindle device. The authors / publishers agreed to make etext versions of their works available to Amazon. Amazon, via their hardware, is creating a derivative work of the author/publisher’s etext and distributing that derivative work in addition to the contractually agreed upon etext. (That is, of course, assuming you buy the legal arguement about the ceration of the derivative work which the author/publishers are making. It’s unsettled legal territory.) This isn’t about the random dude scanning in his random paperback, page by page, so that a computer can read it back to him. It’s mostly not about what happens after the point of first sale (although there is concern that the Amazon provided audio book will compete with authorized audio books.) But the big deal (and the big money) is the legal question and the publishing contract between Amazon & the author/publishers. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/55 "2009-03-02T03:08:59Z")
> [@Vox\_Imperatoris](#): > > But then again, I’m in favor of completely eliminating copyright. > > Valete, > Vox Imperatoris What’s your proposed alternative solution to the problem of allowing authors to profit from their work? -Kris ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/56 "2009-03-02T06:47:27Z")
Regardless of whether the law is on their side, it’s shortsighted of the Author’s Guild to fight on this. Text to speech will still work on all the pirated ebooks. You can always count on content producers to tirelessly work to make their product less useful than the free alternative. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/57 "2009-03-02T17:46:18Z")
You know, when I first heard that the Author’s Guild was making noise about this, I thought it was silly. But I just realized I use the text-to-speech function for _exactly_ the purpose I would have used an audiobook for before. Namely, I use it to keep “reading” even when I’m driving my car. I never did buy an audiobook before, but I have sometimes thought about buying one. On the right day, in the right mood, I probably would have bought one. But now with the text-to-speech feature, I’ll almost certainly never buy one. Because nice dramatic readings are great, but mostly what I’m looking for is just something to recite the words to me when I can’t read them for myself. In consumer marketing terms, if there’s one of me, there are at least thousands of me. And if there are at least thousands of me, authors have probably just lost a lot of potential income due to the text-to-speech feature. So I no longer think their complaint is silly. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/58 "2009-03-02T18:19:48Z")
I don’t know, **Frylock**. Did you listen to the clip of Wil Wheaton posted earlier? The Kindle program might be more advanced than the other text to speech programs I’ve used before, but I doubt it, and the ones I’ve had experience with don’t know jack about stress, tone, or pronunciation of unusual words. You may find that when you get into your car and set a book to TTS, five minutes into the ride you’ll wind up with a headache trying to understand what it’s saying. TTS is useful when there’s no other alternative, but it’s going to be a long time before it beats out a real reader for comprehensibility. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/59 "2009-03-02T18:36:12Z")
I think this is just another example of the “we haven’t got a clue” mentality of some people (to prohibit computer reading). It’s another way of wasting what technology has to offer. All it will take is for someone to invent a gadget that looks at either a book or the Kindle screen and reads the text out loud, not a difficult task. Then the prohibition will be moot. And certainly no one claims that a computer voice is the same as the author’s or a professional human reader. But maybe all you want is the computer voice and don’t care. One of my favorite audio books is Jack Nicholson reading Rudyard Kipling’s _The Elephant’s Child_, and no computer voice can duplicate that. Although I guess the next step in technology would be for Kindle to offer to read any book in the style of Barbra Steisand, Bill Cosby, John Houseman or Jack Nicholson. Whoo! ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760/60 "2009-03-02T19:29:28Z")
> [@iamthewalrus\_3](#): > > Regardless of whether the law is on their side, it’s shortsighted of the Author’s Guild to fight on this. > [@Musicat](#): > > I think this is just another example of the “we haven’t got a clue” mentality of some people (to prohibit computer reading). It’s another way of wasting what technology has to offer. You’re both wrong here, I think. It’s not shortsighted; it’s far-sighted. At some not-too-distant point in the future, text-to-speech will be good enough to constitute a perfect substitute for recorded audiobooks. Furthermore, it has nothing to do with fighting technology. As I said before, the authors aren’t ultimately interested in stopping text-to-speech. What they’re looking for is royalties from the people selling text-to-speech technology. It’s all going to be worked out in licensing negotiations. Frankly, I think this is how the whole digital copying thing is going to be ironed out – people making and selling infringing technologies will pay royalties to a royalty-collection organization, which will distribute them to copyright holders – just like the way it works with ASCAP and BMI. End-users won’t notice it at all. This period we’re in is just part of the adjustment phase. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kindle-2-authors-can-restrict-text-to-speech/487760.md?page=4)