Will The Authors Guild Freak Out About Text To Speech On The iPad?

from the yakety-yak dept

When the second generation Kindle ebook reader launched with a text-to-speech functionality, the Authors Guild freaked out, claiming that this violated a totally made up on the spot aspect of copyright law. Plenty of copyright lawyers dissected this claim in great detail and concluded that the Authors Guild was making up stories about how they wanted copyright law to act, rather than paying attention to what copyright law actually said. There simply is no copyright violation in having a computer read a book aloud to you. However, after the Authors Guild ratcheted up the threats, Amazon finally caved and let authors choose to block the text-to-speech functionality.

Now, with the iPad coming out, some are noticing that it, too, contains such text-to-speech capabilities, and yet oddly, we haven't heard complaints from the Authors Guild (found via Copycense). Have they come to their senses, or have they just not realized it yet?

Filed Under: authors, ebooks, ipad, kindle, text to speech
Companies: amazon, apple, authors guild

Author's Guild Didn't Want To 'Pull An RIAA' But Still Misses The Point

from the it's-a-bit-better dept

Last week, in discussing its attempt to settle its lawsuit with Google over the Google book scanning project, the Authors Guild posted a rather interesting public letter, entitled To RIAA or Not to RIAA, That was the Question. In defending the settlement, it notes that it could have fought the lawsuit to the end, but that it might have lost. In fact, this is why I supported the idea that Google should have fought on, because it seemed like Google had a strong fair use case -- something the Authors Guild admits. Even though the Authors Guild says that it disagrees that the book scanning project was fair use, an awful lot of copyright legal scholars seemed to believe that it was, in fact, fair use.

But the more interesting point is that the Authors Guild noted that even if it did win the lawsuit, that could actually make things worse, and it pointed to the RIAA's Pyrrhic victories over file sharing systems:

Our settlement negotiations went on with full knowledge of what happened to the music industry. The RIAA (the Recording Industry Association of America) won victory after victory, defeating Napster and Grokster with ground-breaking legal rulings. The RIAA also went after countless individuals, chasing down infringement wherever they could track it down.

It didn't work. The infringement just moved elsewhere, in unpredictable ways. Nothing seems to drive innovation among copyright pirates as much as a defeat in the courts. That innovation didn't truly abate until Apple came along with its iPod/iTunes model, making music easily and legally available at a reasonable price. By then, the music industry was devastated.

While I applaud the Authors Guild for recognizing that suing (and even winning) don't help you innovate and can backfire massively in driving innovation underground, it does still feel like the Authors Guild got the wrong message out of this. Despite what it claims above, the "innovation among copyright [infringers]" did not really "abate" with the introduction of the iPod/iTunes. While the Authors Guild is correct that offering a legal solution is better than offering nothing or fighting innovation, it feels like it's overestimating how much of the market transformation its facing is due to infringement vs. how much is due to economic forces that will occur even without infringement in the market.

Filed Under: authors guild, book scanning, copyright, fair use
Companies: authors guild, google, riaa

Ursula K. Le Guin Resigns From Authors Guild, Because It Didn't Keep Up Its Silly Fight With Google

from the good-luck-to-you dept

Ursula K. Le Guin is a very famous author who many people insist is one of the best -- though, I have to admit never having read her stuff. Yet, she is one of those who is rather aggressive in policing the copyrights on her work, and who does not tend to side with those who believe in concepts like "fair use." Most certainly, she is not a fan of open culture. A few years ago, she got into a bit of a scrap with Cory Doctorow, because he dared to publish a single paragraph of hers in a blogpost as part of a larger (positive!) commentary.

Her latest scrap with the world of copyright is to publicly resign from the Authors Guild. I'm no fan of the Authors Guild myself, and find that it tends to take a rather antiquated view on things -- from its absolutely ridiculous claim that a Kindle with text-to-speech software infringes on authors' copyrights, to its equally backwards take on Google's book scanning project, which helped index books and make them more findable which many authors have found helps increase sales.

While I am not a fan of the (still ongoing) settlement efforts between Google and the Authors Guild, it is this settlement that has upset Le Guin so much. In her resignation letter, she claims refers to Google as "the devil," and claims that the Guild has abandoned "the whole concept of copyright." Of course, nothing is further from the truth, as the Authors Guild notes in its reply (found via Michael Scott). As the Authors Guild points out, Google had a more than decent chance of winning the lawsuit because of something called fair use, which Le Guin still doesn't appear to recognize as a key part of copyright law. In her own introduction to copyright law, fair use makes no appearance whatsoever.

It really is a shame. Many people tell me that Le Guin is a fantastic writer, but I have no desire to read works by someone who is afraid I might like it so much I might share that joy with someone else. I also have no interest in reading works by a science fiction author who seems to hate technology to the point of calling a tool like Google "the devil."

Filed Under: authors guild, book scanning, copyright, fair use, ursula k le guin
Companies: authors guild, google

Protests Against The Authors Guild For Forcing Amazon To Disable Kindle TTS

from the freedom-to-innovate dept

We were surprised and disappointed when Amazon gave in to the Authors Guild's baseless claim that the TTS somehow violated its copyrights. It looks like a lot of others are disappointed as well. A group is now organizing a protest against the Authors Guild for trying to determine whether or not Amazon was allowed to innovate. As the EFF notes, "The publishing industry shouldn't have veto power over new technology." If you're in New York City, you should look into the details of the protest on Tuesday.

Filed Under: authors guild, innovation, kindle, protest, tts
Companies: amazon, authors guild