Slashdot Mirror
Author's Guild Says Kindle's Text-To-Speech Software Illegal
Mike writes "The Author's Guild claims that the new Kindle's text-to-speech software is illegal, stating that 'They don't have the right to read a book out loud,' said Paul Aiken, executive director of the Authors Guild. 'That's an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law.' Forget for a moment that text-to-speech doesn't copy an existing work. And forget the odd notion that the artificial enunciation of plain text is equivalent to a person's nuanced and emotive reading. The Guild's claim is that even to read out loud is a production akin to an illegal copy, or a public performance."
Shes going to be pissed.
Also, there will be a small royalty charge for moving your lips as you read. This has two benefits. There will be fewer people moving their lips as they read. And there will be fewer people reading.
-Loyal
I aim to misbehave.
I forbid such usage- and deny you the ablity to read this comment out loud to your friends either.
As a Microsoft Preffered Partner, I understand this situation. How much will it cost me for the rights to read things out. Also, how far should I bend over?
Rumor has it that if they are successful, the Authors Guild will next file suit against God for providing a source of light outside in daytime.
Same authors guild who want a royalty on all used book sales?
Guys, do the world a favor, go play in traffic.
Forget the fact that right now synthesized text to speech is painful to listen vs a human voice
Coming up next, "Moby Dick" as read by GlaDOS.
The Author's Guild has me over a barrel. 2-4 books a day (2 at nap time if I'm home and another couple before bed). Man, I never realized that reading Dr Seuss to my 3-year-old would be such a nightmare in terms of derivative rights and royalties.
Even though I've been doing this daily for years, does it help me at all that he's yet to give me any kind of financial compensation for it?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
"Once upon a time, Natalie Portman had a big bowl of hot grits..."
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
No, and I don't move my lips while reading either. I read substantially faster than I can talk. But not faster than a woman can talk.
& I'm gona record Microsoft Sam reading the book and publish it as an Audio book!
So no more bed time stories?
Just apply for a bed time story license from the authors guild. Make sure that you educate your children about copyright law though -- the license is only valid for you and if they repeat the story to their friends at school we'll have to haul them into court.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Only if the text reader sounds like Morgan Freeman
Spend the $.41 or whateverit'satthesedays for a stamp and scribble down a short note telling them to get Aiken to STFU.
Add a disclaimer at the bottom indicating that Aiken must read the letter himself (it can't be read by his secretary to him) and that he must not move his lips while doing so. Anything else would require that he pays audio royalties to the author of the letter. He can't have it both ways.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
The goal of artificial speech has always been to create a lifelike, authentic performance of human speech, not the more reproduction of a sequence of synthetic phonemes.
You accidentally the more reproduction? The whole thing?
Don't make them prove the pen is mightier than the sword. League of Extraordinary Barristers to the rescue!
If you must keep groaning, please try to do it in a rhythm I can dance to
I have different voices for each writter. And, by the way, you have the worse Scotish accent I've ever read.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
"As one of my old bosses used to say so frequently, "Fuck you, sue me."
Which is great advice unless your boss is Dog the Bounty Hunter.
"But this one goes to 11!"
That's the worst car analogy in the history of slashdot!
That's going to be tough to gauge... If reading to my child makes me smile and they claim 10% royalties, does that mean I have to smirk at them? If reading to my child helps him fall asleep, does that mean I owe them a couple of scrapings off of an Ambien? If I read a scary story and he has a nightmare, do I need to jump out of the author's closet and shout, "Boo!"?
They really need to put together a cost-schedule for this stuff.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Maybe authors get higher royalties for audio books, and they are worried that authors will lose some of the potential higher earnings.
I see some RIAA/AG tinfoil hattery coming after that comment.
Your ad here.
Millions of kids read their kids bed time stories
I, for one, welcome our new underage parent overlords.
Of course. You read it aloud, record it and then process it through a speech-recognizing software, and - bingo! Encryption broken. It is more of an analog hole really. I am waiting anxiously for the equivalent of HDCP for e-books. Perhaps a device that scramble the letters if it hears you reading the text. It will be mandatory in every ebook reader or consumer oriented OS, of course, or else you can't upload text to it. The IP must be protected at all costs from these damn pirates.
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
The closest example I can think of is buying a Harry Potter book and reading it to your kids.
I wonder if they'd sue you for torture as well.
By that logic, all performances by Keanu Reeves are not derivitive works.
Woah.
I'm not sure anyone would want exclusive rights to the derivative work I make based on a burrito.
Pretty valid point, but the real problem with the analogy was it consisted of a frozen burrito and a microwave, and not some bizarrely-cobbled together analogy involving the automotive realm.
That is the best analogy using kitchen appliances and Mexican frozen food that I've heard so far this week.
Better known as 318230.
I have read it. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of reading it aloud, so now I have to go to court.