Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Authors Guild Silent Over iBooks Text-To-Speech

Posted by Soulskill on from the selective-interest dept.

Last year we discussed news that the Authors Guild took issue with the Kindle's text-to-speech function, claiming it was illegal for the device to read their books aloud. Amazon disagreed, but said they were willing to disable the feature upon request from rightsholders. Now, jamie notes a recent article by David Pogue at the NY Times in which he points out that Apple's free iBooks app does the same thing, yet the Authors Guild has remained silent. Quoting: "... Now swipe down the page with two fingers to make the iPhone start reading the book to you, out loud, with a synthesized voice. It even turns the pages automatically and keeps going until you tap with two fingers to stop it. Yes, this is exactly the feature that debuted in the Amazon Kindle and was then removed when publishers screamed bloody murder. But somehow, so far, Apple has gotten away with it, maybe because nobody's even realized this feature is in there." That said, the feature was certainly noticed during the launch of the iPad, so perhaps the Authors Guild has other reasons for holding their peace.

49 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. so apple does not like blind people? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 2, Funny

    so apple does not like blind people?

    1. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How did you get that impression?

      The touchscreen interface should have been a big clue.

      As a general rule, touchscreen interfaces are not vision-impaired friendly.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    2. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by BorgDrone · · Score: 3, Informative

      So that is why the National Federation of the Blind posted this press release after the iPad's launch commending Apple for how accesible the iPad is to the blind ?

    3. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by hansamurai · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have a friend who's totally blind and is incredibly adept at technology. He runs his own web site, uses his iPhone daily, and compliments/complains daily to companies who don't have accessibility features on their apps and gadgets. He also plays video games and records himself playing and posts the videos on Youtube.

      Here's his contacts if anyone is interested in reading stuff from him:
      http://twitter.com/liamerven
      http://www.youtube.com/liamerven

      --
      Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
    4. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by Smauler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So who thinks a _touchscreen_ is a decent choice for someone visually impaired? Something that relies on hand eye coordination, with no physical feedback?

      I know I'm probably going to be proved wrong in a minute by the blind iPad fanbois.

    5. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by bennomatic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, sighted, blind and deaf people can connect bluetooth keyboards to their iPhones now. Only dumb ones can't.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    6. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by GlassHeart · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know I'm probably going to be proved wrong in a minute by the blind iPad fanbois.

      So why not do a simple web search before talking about something you don't actually know?

      "When it comes to embedding accessibility, Apple has set the standard in recent years," - Robin Spinks, principal manager of digital accessibility at the Royal National Institute of Blind People.

      "The Apple iPad is one hundred percent accessible straight out of the box... Blind individuals can glide a finger over the screen, and as they glide their fingers, the options will be spoken aloud. When the users hear an option that they want to select, they can tap their fingers on that option twice, and the option will then be selected. There is no barrier to us blind folks using the Apple iPad's touch screen." - Waldorf PC

      "Even though I have pointed out some access barriers that still need to be overcome, the overwhelming majority of features and functions on the iPad are accessible. I have to applaud Apple for once again producing a tremendous mainstream device with accessibility built-in, and at no extra cost." - Darren Burton, AccessWorld

    7. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by purplepolecat · · Score: 2, Funny

      So who thinks a _touchscreen_ is a decent choice for someone visually impaired? Something that relies on hand eye coordination, with no physical feedback?

      I know I'm probably going to be proved wrong in a minute by the blind iPad fanbois.

      lkdsrkjhskg! kflijaf fkjhskjh apple aj nnd kjhkdjsfg, rjj ok !

    8. Re:so apple does not like blind people? by milkmage · · Score: 5, Informative

      apparently the BLIND think it's pretty slick

      this is the American Foundation for the Blind. ORG

      http://www.afb.org/blog/blog_comments.asp?TopicID=6149&FolderID=25

      Yes, it's an all-touch-screen device. Yes, I've always said that touch screens and blind people don't go together -- it's suggested, usually by slightly dumb people, that I could just memorize where all the icons were and then I could touch the screen at the right spot and get the right thing to happen... Do they really think they could withdraw $100 from an ATM that way? Dial a phone?

      But, the iPhone and iPad have an ingenious and delightful interface that actually makes the touch screen a pleasure to use.

      There will be a proper, full-featured review of the iPad in AccessWorld soon. These are just the first impressions of a so-far-happy customer.

      here's more.
      http://www.afb.org/afbpress/pub.asp?DocID=aw110206

  2. What's the problem by mark72005 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How does this hurt them on books where there is no audio version available?

    1. Re:What's the problem by savanik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because of poorly written contracts. Most current contracts don't have a distinction between 'audiobook' and 'text-to-speech conversion'. If the authors don't defend their copyright on the text-to-speech conversion, it can be legally argued that they don't mind if the publisher has rights to produce audiobooks - or that they actually sold the right to the publisher in the first place, even if it wasn't explicitly stated in the contract. Considering that we're typically talking about significant amounts of money, that an author may have to live on for the next few years while they write their next work... yeah, it can hurt them, because the original contracts didn't take future technology into account.

    2. Re:What's the problem by cygnwolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I never understood the first time around how TTS was different from setting it to render in oversize font or in a different typeface...

      --
      Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
    3. Re:What's the problem by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not sure that's the issue. An author is under no obligation to defend a copyright or risk losing it, the way he might be obliged to defend a trademark or risk losing it. He can sue for copyright infringement today, tomorrow, or 50 years from now (under the current regime).

      I think the debate is more about whether a text-to-speech process actually produces a derivative work. Authors have argued in the past that it does. But one could also argue that a computer reproducing a work via text-to-speech is no different than reproducing it by displaying its text on a screen -- and therefore it does not violate copyright.

      Authors, on the other hand, don't want to lose the ability to sell audiobook editions because devices exist that can read books aloud automatically. Audiobook sales account for a large amount of royalties.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    4. Re:What's the problem by mapkinase · · Score: 2, Funny

      It hurts them emotionally

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    5. Re:What's the problem by DarthVain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or....

      Have you bought an audio book lately? Most the ones I have seen cost a lot more than a paper back book.

      If I have the ability to buy a 10$ paper back book and have it read to me, why the hell would I buy the 40$ audio book?

      Another example of industry not keeping up with technology and trying to use the courts and copyright laws to enforce their business model.

      This is about greed, pure and simple. Considering the type of people that most buy audio books (blind and/or old people) I find it kind of despicable.

      Before paying what you paid for a service you could really only get one way it was hard to feel bad about the premium. Now that it is available more readily for cheaper and for all titles, and they want to force you to still pay more for the privilege? Sick.

    6. Re:What's the problem by Confusador · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I have the ability to buy a 10$ paper back book and have it read to me, why the hell would I buy the 40$ audio book?

      Have you listened to a audio book read by a person compared to the same work done by a computer? The person doesn't even have to be very good to win that battle. It's an interesting conversation in light of the potential of future tech, and to be sure it's getting better, but there's a long way to go before professional book readers will be looking for work.

    7. Re:What's the problem by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair, audiobooks do involve a degree of work. Most audiobooks are abridged, so you need to edit the book and get the edits approved by the author. You need to hire a celebrity reader. You need to rent a studio to record the reading in, with an audio person present to make sure everything is warm and punchy. A producer needs to edit everything together. None of that is cheap. And all of that is chasing a niche within a niche.

      Of course, text-to-speech is basically free. And means the old audiobook process is obsolete for most titles. But charging more for the audiobook version makes sense.

      --
      The ______ Agenda
    8. Re:What's the problem by DarthVain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your kidding right?

      I was about to argue that shouldn't the customer have the right to make decisions about what they are willing to pay for? I mean it might not be as nice as a professional reader, but I might say I am willing to buy it because it is half the cost...

      then... "should have a say in how a work is performed"

      Your seriously telling me that the Author of a work has the RIGHT to tell ME how I READ his book?

      I am pretty sure if I want to read it backwards, upside down, in Klingon, to my best friend, I have the right to do so. If I wish to have a computer synthesize voice for me, I think I have that right too.

      Don't get me wrong, if it is going to be distributed in voice, or film or something, then sure. But I have the right to do what I want with it after I buy it so long as I don't copy it and claim it as my own or try to sell copies. Gah!

  3. Does Apple sell books? by BobMcD · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe the difference is that Amazon is seen as more of a threat than Apple?

    Not being rhetorical here, I'm genuinely asking.

    1. Re:Does Apple sell books? by Bodero · · Score: 2, Informative

      With a statement like that, you'd almost expect Amazon to be selling eBooks at a 60-to-1 ratio compared to rival Apple.

    2. Re:Does Apple sell books? by Karlt1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With a statement like that, you'd almost expect Amazon to be selling eBooks at a 60-to-1 ratio compared to rival Apple.

      Wow, a whole sample size of one author.....

    3. Re:Does Apple sell books? by Brandee07 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd think it's because Apple is a scarier target. They were able to bully Amazon, but Apple has a top-notch legal team and a demonstrated disinclination to budge when pressures like this are applied.

  4. The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by Cheech+Wizard · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe the Authors Guild has learned a lesson in how not to be pricks.

    1. Re:The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I find that an unlikely explanation. It's more likely that there's something going on between the Guild and Apple.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by RevWaldo · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's more likely that there's something going on between the Guild and Apple.

      Unlike Amazon, Apple stays out of the Guild's way. One Infinite Loop is crawling with Strangers. Who do you think arranged their contract with Foxconn? You think all those "suicides" were from worker stress? Keep dreaming. Guild work is clean, professional. It's surgical with them. In a way they're the only organization Steve Jobs still respects. And they don't get dames get in the way!

      .

      --
      Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
    3. Re:The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I doubt the Guild has any special relationship with Apple. Unlike the MPAA and the RIAA, the Guild works directly on behalf of content creators who make up their membership. If the members don't make a fuss the Guild won't make a fuss. My guess is publishers, and therefore authors, are getting better terms from Apple since they're the underdog in e-books. With better compensation, publishers and authors aren't complaining.

      --
      Developers: We can use your help.
    4. Re:The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Amazon did not negotiate audio rights for the book when they set up their contracts. They got into trouble because of it and disabled the feature until the could negotiate the audio rights. Apple saw this and, when they negotiated their contracts, made sure that they had the audio rights for all books in the iBook Store.

      Apple, as the e-book follower, learned about this problem in advance from Amazon's leadership in the market and had the contracts set up to allow audio. There's no big conspiracy here.

    5. Re:The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That sounds great, but is it true. No disrespect, but I have read too many scenarios like this around here only to find that they are just complete guesswork on the part of the writer and have nothing to do with reality.

      So how do you know that Apple has negotiated audio rights for their works?

    6. Re:The Authors Guild has learned a lesson? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So how do you know that Apple has negotiated audio rights for their works?

      I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

      Seriously, I don't know. It's guesswork. But it's based on Apple's track record.

      First, Apple negotiated with the music companies to make sure that their customers could use their music in iMovie and iDVD. Second, Apple negotiated ring-tones with the music industry. Third, Apple encrypted music going to their Airport Express in order to protect the music companies. Fourth, Apple licensed Amazon's "One-Click" patent.

      Apple has shown itself more than willing to license and protect the IP of it's Apple Store providers. So it would make sense that Apple would have considered this angle and made certain that, when they negotiated with the rights-holders, they had the right to play audio.

      I mean, it makes no sense for the Author's Guild to castigate Amazon yet remain silent in regard to Apple. Since anything Apple immediately hits the airwaves, you would think it would be just the opposite. So if they're staying silent, it probably means that they have an agreement with Apple. It may be an Apple imposed one--"You want to be in the iBook Store, you have to give us audio rights"--but it's an agreement.

      Remember the issue with Amazon was that Amazon was creating audio versions of books without having negotiated the right to do so, unlike companies like Audible.com. It wasn't that the Author's Guild was against this kind of software, just that they wanted to be compensated for it. Whether they deserved to be compensated or not is debatable, no doubt. But Apple won't bother with those kinds of arguments--they'll just give them some money no matter how ridiculous it is (see ring tones).

  5. Publishers Loves Their DRM by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since last year the LOC has made a rule that DRM breaks are legal if readers are shut out:

    (6) Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book's read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Publishers Loves Their DRM by Brandee07 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, the new rule is pretty limited.

      If you can get the ebook legally from Amazon, B&N, and iBooks, but only iBooks has TTS enabled, but you only have a Kindle, then breaking the DRM would technically be illegal, even though the only TTS-enabled copy won't run on your device.

  6. Not quite the same... by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Informative

    FWIW, I had no idea the feature was there. The annoying thing is that you have to turn on Voice Over in the accessibility settings...for the entire phone. So the whole interface of the phone changes (you have to double tap buttons, etc) and it's quite annoying to have it on if it's not something you need. I guess you can turn voiceover on/off at will, but it's a decent amount of hassle.

    1. Re:Not quite the same... by wygit · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can go into settings -> General -> Accessability -> Triple-click Home and set it to "Toggle VoiceOver".

      So you're reading the book, you tripleclick the home button, swipe down with two fingers and it starts reading to you. Tap with two fingers to pause the reader. tripleclick home again to turn off VoiceOver.

      Not something I'll probably ever use, but it works.

    2. Re:Not quite the same... by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the Kindle the Author guild can frame their argument as one of licensing since the voice over feature was promoted as a standalone feature for general use...

      No they can't. Reading aloud is not one of the exclusive rights of copyright owners.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  7. Its getting ridiculous. by cosm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The douchers that are hamstringing the text-to-speech providers need to be bitch-slapped, twice.

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
  8. A hard choice for many Slashdotters: by Kurofuneparry · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hate on Apple for having the feature while Amazon can't/doesn't or hate on litigious media groups for selective lawsuits?

    Two very touchy topics in the /. world!

    Me? Oh, I don't discriminate.... I hate everyone! Then again... I'm an idiot ....

    --
    ...... and idiots rule the world....
    1. Re:A hard choice for many Slashdotters: by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 2, Funny

      I may be the king of idiots, buy my kingdom is vast, and my subjects are everywhere.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
  9. Who knew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Who knew pissing off disabled folks (like me) wasn't a good idea to drive up business? All they accomplished with their little tantrum was to ensure that any books I buy in the future will be from the used market, to avoid supporting them.

    We do seriously live in a society where (if everything could be magically made accessible tomorrow for free), some predatory capitalist goons would still try and charge us disabled folks $1500 for equal access... all the wile claiming to support the rights of disabled folks.

  10. Writers love Apple by Sarusa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, I know there are still a few iconclasts who use Windows (or TeX for the hardcore) but all the published authors I personally know are Apple fanboys. MBPs, Mac Pros (for writing? I know, I know), iPhones, the works. I imagine they don't want to bite the hand that pets them... But I'll ask one why it's okay for Apple and not Amazon.

  11. Amazon owns audio book company by joabj · · Score: 3, Informative

    Also, fwiw, Amazon owns Audible, the largest purveyor of spoken word books (or "books on tape" as they used to be called)...

  12. The idea was bad, they had no right by gurps_npc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They had no business bring suit and I hope they have realized it. There is a difference between a copy of a book in a different format and a program that translates something into a different format. Is the rights holder of a German version of Harry Potter going to sue someone that writes a computer program that translates English into German? No of course not.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:The idea was bad, they had no right by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They had no business bring suit and I hope they have realized it. There is a difference between a copy of a book in a different format and a program that translates something into a different format.

      But we aren't talking about software that creates a copy in a different format or language. This is software that reads the book out loud to you. No copy is created and none of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner are infringed. The very notion that they could have a claim here is laughable.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  13. Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!! by sharkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    My kindergartner is being exposed to this sort of copyright infringement EVERY DAY! Not only is there text-to-speech conversion at school (the teacher, who should be providing a better example) but they expect ME to convert text-to-speech at home and READ ALOUD to my kids! When will someone put a stop to this nefarious reading of books aloud?

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  14. Removed? by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 2, Informative

    feature that debuted in the Amazon Kindle and was then removed

    No, it wasn't. It was disabled on select books if and only if the publisher specificially demanded it.

    --
    R.Mo
  15. The guild doesn't care because it sucks so bad by n5yat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just for fun I enabled the text-to-speech on my iPad. It's so bad, it's laughable. The guild has nothing to worry about because only someone desperate would use that sucky text-to-speech instead of a good audio book.

    1. Re:The guild doesn't care because it sucks so bad by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't get why text to speech is so bad. Has anyone made a reader that, rather than trying to pronounce text, just uses a database of prerecorded words? A single-word wav file takes about 7k. There are roughly 200,000 words in the English language. That works out to 1.4 gigs. Doesn't seem like it would be that hard, although you'd probably have to pay Sean Connery a lot to pronounce the whole dictionary. So hire a few Connery imitators, who can't do a passable Connery?

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    2. Re:The guild doesn't care because it sucks so bad by pregister · · Score: 3, Informative

      Honestly, it wouldn't be much better than current text-to-speech. The problem isn't the computer voice...sure, its cheesy but I could get used to that. The problem is everything else. The phrasing, the intonation, the flow of the words. These are things that make TTS laughable. A database of some voice actor reading every word in the language wouldn't help this at all.

  16. Re:Robots have Rights too? by wygit · · Score: 2

    Amazon gets sued for providing read-aloud technology on its reader, and Target gets sued, and loses, for NOT having read-aloud capability on its website.

    Whose rights dominate?

  17. Re:Speak & Spell by kimvette · · Score: 4, Funny

    Would you sit through a 3 hour movie where the main actor was a speak & spell?

    Well, I have seen Keanu Reeves films. I think that's a fairly close comparison. ;)

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50