Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Caves On Kindle 2 Text-To-Speech
On Wednesday we discussed news that the Authors Guild had objected to the text-to-speech function on Amazon's Kindle 2, claiming that it infringed on audio book copyright. Today, Amazon said that while the feature is legally sound, they would be willing to disable text-to-speech on a title-by-title basis at the rightsholder's request. "We have already begun to work on the technical changes required to give authors and publishers that choice. With this new level of control, publishers and authors will be able to decide for themselves whether it is in their commercial interests to leave text-to-speech enabled. We believe many will decide that it is."
All of them, now that they know they can charge extra for it. But honestly, how many people want Stephen King to sound like Steven Hawking ?
This would be that sort of thing without any special version thereof.
The big deal here was that it was cutting out another revenue stream (which was more per unit than the books were...) and cutting out the pay to the person doing the book reading. Unfortunately, not all books are converted to audio. Most are not, actually.
Now, if Kindle can do audio books, it's sort of fine- but it's going to be an overpriced media player that one could accomplish this limited result with a smaller, cheaper device. The thing that made the Kindle even more special is that you didn't NEED someone to read out a book into audio format, it was going to open up a larger space up for the blind. That is now up in the air that there will be any such thing.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Amazon/Kindle should stick to their guns and let the end user decide to turn on the TTS engine or not.
Then the authors who complained to the Guild would stick to their guns and withdraw some works from Kindle entirely. Would you want such an outcome?
"how hard could it be to set up a robot finger to press "Next Page" + a digital camera to photograph each page + OCR if desired????"
Most people cannot set that up. The point of DRM is not to be un-hackable, it is to be un-hackable by most people, and a system that requires the assembly of a robot is beyond what most Kindle users can set up. In fact, Kindle would be the most successful DRM system ever if it required a robotic finger to defeat, because that is a circumvention measure that cannot be distributed as a file over the Internet, the way systems like deCSS can be.
Palm trees and 8
Even if the encryption algorithm and hardware were "unhackable", how hard could it be to set up a robot finger to press "Next Page" + a digital camera to photograph each page + OCR if desired????
Sounds like a lot more work than just buying a paper copy, gillotineing the spine off and shoving it in a sheet fed scanner.
Being moderately effective against the casual copiers is about the best a DRM scheme can home for. The geeks and the serious pirates will always find a way to get an unprotected copy.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Although I find it abhorrent from a copyright law perspective, this might have been a very clever move by Amazon. These rights holders who can't make money legitimately have been going around trying to make money by making extortionate threats. Amazon just removed that card from the Authors Guild's hand. I wonder how the authors -- who are supposed to be served by the Authors Guild -- feel about it. Kindle and Kindle 2 were 2 of the best things that have happened to authors; nice to alienate Amazon.
I wonder how many of the authors will now 'opt out' of the text-to-speech feature. I'm guessing: none.
Amazon showed this threat for what it was: extortion.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
I realize you're just giving this as an example, but the better thing to do here is "Stop giving these companies your money!" if you truly believe DRM should be stopped. Where possible, buy from paces that do not support it.
irrelevant. It takes *ONE* person to do it and distribute the file. You missed the "and OCR it".
Yeah, people are so intelligent that they have been buying DRMed files for years on iTunes while CDs exist for a similar price.
And Then they are again so intelligent that some pay premium to strip the DRM from their old iTunes tracks instead of downloading these from another source.
Yeah, people are not completely stupid...
Stupidity is the root of all evil.
I've yet to see a working DRM system. Every single one of them that I've come across has the effect of inconveniencing at least some legitimate customers for one reason or another, and I have yet to find a piece of DRM protected content that is not available freely and illegally in its DRM free form.
Basically, DRM artificially increases the value of the (already free) infringing content, at the expense of the legal content.
I'm not seeing any difference between "digital rights management" and the MicroProse C=64 disks I used to buy which used digital errors to block copying.
"Digital rights management" goes beyond just copying, though that is the primary driver. It includes not being able to use "region encoded" DVDs that you bought elsewhere. It means they don't want to let you skip over the copyright warning when you play your movie. It means they don't want to let you have a computer read a book that you just paid for. What does any of that have to do with "copy protection"?
Amazon should not have caved to this ridiculous request. The final choice is with consumers, who should refuse to buy any book that they can't run through text-to-speech or any other device that enables them to use their purchase.
While I agree that Amazon should have told these guys to go fuck themselves, what they have actually done is a brilliant "carrot and stick" maneuver that will ultimately get them what they want:
1. Amazon gives in to the Guild's demand (the carrot), and will conveniently label those books on their site which prohibit TTS.
2. People who think the Authors Guild is a bunch of dicks can boycott the clearly-marked titles and purchase others.
3. Sales of TTS-prohibited books plummet (the stick).
4. Authors Guild realizes that their greed has actually cost them money, and reverses their decision.
~Philly
>>> I'm not seeing any difference between "digital rights management" and the MicroProse C=64 disks I used to buy which used digital errors to block copying. It seems they both achieve the same goal: Stop copying and also block the user from uploading the Microprose game to a friend.
Well I am sorry, but I clearly see a difference.
"Copy Protection" did not prevent you from performing any of the following actions...
1. It did not prevent you from using your software on a portable unit. (SX-64)
2. It did not prevent you from using your software on a newer, upgraded model. (C=128) (Although this could be debated if the protection scheme turned out to be incompatible with the newer hardware. In those cases, the publisher, inevitably released patches or new versions that were compatible if the market conditions were acceptable.)
3. It did not prevent you from using your software on a replacement unit. (New C=64 machine purchased to replace broken C=64 machine)
4. It did not prevent you from taking your software over to a friends house and playing it with your friend. (If it was multi-player. At least you didn't have to cart your C=64 around with you to show off your new purchase.)
5. It did not prevent your from donating or re-selling that software to someone else after you no longer had a use for it. (Right of First Sale.)
6. It did not prevent you from using the software if you just happened to forget the password, forget the login account, or otherwise fail to validate the myriad other ways that are now used to ensure that the person attempting to use the software in indeed the original purchaser.
All of these issues are and have been generally applied to consumer purchases in the past. No one places DRM type restrictions on my purchase of an automobile, house, or TV set. Yet "Digital Rights Management" seeks to prevent the consumer from doing any one of the above.
In summary, "Copy Protection" prevented you from making unauthorized "copies" of the software. "DRM" is designed to prevent you from making unauthorized "uses" of that same software. However, letting a corporation who's ultimate motive is monetary profit (Nothing wrong with that) decide what is a legal and authorized "use" (Everything wrong with that) goes against the entire grain and intent of Copyright laws. Copyright laws were enacted to create a fair and balanced benefit between the author AND the public welfare! If we allow corporations to restrict how knowledge can be used (and that IS what intellectual property is, knowledge.) then we restrict everyone's, including our own, future development and welfare.
Excellent summary. People try hard to obfuscate the difference.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
"That's not a DRM break, it exploits the fact that DRM can't work."
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
No, this is Amazon's attempt to play nice with publishers because they need content for the Kindle to work.
Holding their ground would be doing the opposite.
They know that time is on their side. They are hoping that, like with iTMS, e-books will inevitably represent the largest slice of the book & magazine pie. At that point they will be able to do whatever they like.
Good text-to-speech could conceivably kill off the audio book market. But I don't think that you could say it's the same thing as a copyrighted reading of a book performance. It's more like reading a book to your child. So for Amazon to stand their ground they'd have to recognize this as reinterpreting the law to force a market for a product that people eventually aren't going to want or need. And then say, "nope".
You are not thinking this through to the obvious conclusion.
Try it like this:
Simply put, if it takes $1000 to copy the first $10 book, and $0 for an infinite number of copies, the DRM is broken.
Welcome to the digital age, once you get the hang of it, it's pretty neat.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti