Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Wed 18th Feb 2009 00:00 UTC
Legal The Author's Guild has been having some trouble coping with the Kindle 2's Read to Me feature because it supposedly undermines author's rights. Their argument? "They don't have the right to read a book out loud." It sounds ridiculous; we've been reading out loud since we were wee little children, and text-to-speech has been in use since before the Google Empire (by hundreds of years technically, and by decades literally). However, after explanation by Engadget's very own pretentious ex-copyright attorney, the blurred lines of law and lawlessness gets even blurrier. Does the Author's Guild have a valid point, or are they splitting hairs?
Thread beginning with comment 350192
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: wha?
by steogede2 on Sun 22nd Feb 2009 14:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: wha?"
Member since:

It's not about the crowds or playing it in public.
It is about what they're selling you and 'lost sales' of audio books.

For example, let's say they sell a book for $1.00.
They also sell the audio book for $3.00.

If you have the kindle with text-to-speech then they have a lost profit opportunity.

That's their argument. I totally disagree with it ;)

I am glad you do, as there arguement is fundamentally flawed. If they sell the book for $1 and the audio book for $3 - then what is to stop them selling the e-book for $5 and making even more profit? After all, it's not as though Kindle can take the paper book, OCR it and then read it out with the emotion and drama of an audio book.

Reply Parent Score: 1