Amazon to allow disabling of Kindle 2 text-to-speech

Advertisement (Why?)

Amazon is to allow rights-holders to choose to disable the text-to-speech feature of the Kindle 2 e-book reader on a title by title basis, after the company received criticism that the feature would help Amazon escape royalty fees.

The new Kindle, which was unveiled at the start of February, is able to read out e-books aloud. However, unlike audio books, additional royalties are not paid - something which seems to have upset the Author's Guild according to an editorial published in the New York Times last Wednesday.

Titled "The Kindle Swindle", and written by the president of the Author's Guild, Roy Blount Jr., it argues against the Kindle's text-to-speech function. In the editorial, Mr Blount Jr. says that authors must be "duly vigilant about any new means of transmitting their work"

According to Reuters, the Author's Guild has recommended that its members bring up the issue of the Kindle when negotiating book contracts.

In a statement on Friday, Amazon said, "Kindle 2's experimental text-to-speech feature is legal: no copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given. Nevertheless, we strongly believe many rightsholders will be more comfortable with the text-to-speech feature if they are in the driver's seat.

"Therefore, we are modifying our systems so that rightsholders can decide on a title by title basis whether they want text-to-speech enabled or disabled for any particular title."

The statement finished, "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."

(1 reply) #1 GreyWolfSC on 02 Mar 2009 - 16:29

Is Roy Blount Jr. going to sue parents for reading books to children? No matter, the Kindle isn't going to be a viable product unless it's like $50.

#1.1 +TCLN Ryster on 02 Mar 2009 - 21:27

GreyWolfSC said,

I was just thinking the same thing. If I get a kindle and open a book on it, then get my sister to read it aloud to me, I've got to pay them royalties because it's being read aloud? I see no difference between my sister reading it to me, and the device reading it to me. This Roy Blount character should just go away and read a book or something.

#2 MioTheGreat on 02 Mar 2009 - 16:45

This is stupid.

Technology has eliminated the need for a strictly audio book. They can't fight that forever.

#3 simon360 on 02 Mar 2009 - 16:53

...so blind people aren't allowed to listen to these books anymore?

Isn't that a little bit... low?

#4 DanCADMan on 02 Mar 2009 - 17:15

Yeah, I don't think anyone really cares anymore whether or not their "content" is read or heard, just so long as they get their money. It's not even costing these authors any money. I could understand it if the authors had to spend time reading it and then spend their time creating the audio files. An audiobook costs money to make, but the Kindle's ability to read it dosen't cost them money. Greedy *******...

(1 reply) #5 yert* on 02 Mar 2009 - 17:32

Yeah because everyone interested in the audiobook will take a pass on them because the kindle can read to them in its robot voice...Lame as hell. Who the hell wants to buy a kindle anyway it's too damn expensive. If it's going to be over $150 it should at least come with a bundle of books and a freakin case.

Last edited by yert* on 02 Mar 2009 - 18:19

#5.1 xploit1030 on 02 Mar 2009 - 17:39

That is exactly what I was thinking. I'm willing to bet any voice actor that doesn't sound like Ben Stien will not be without a job. When I listen to an audiobook the work of the actor can really take the book much farther than a voice remnant of the movie 'Wargames'.

#6 C_Guy on 02 Mar 2009 - 18:28

In my day books were written on paper and read by humans. What a 'novel' concept...

#7 m.keeley on 02 Mar 2009 - 19:52

So if it's legal don't give the authors any choice, if they don't like it tough. The vast majority wouldn't leave as Amazon are probably a major source of income. But no, much better (read easier) to penalise the customers who have forked out $360 for their Kindle.

Having said that the quality of the text to speech isn't really that great and takes quite a bit of concentration to listen to, it doesn't help that's it's mono-tone.

#8 KreepLX360 on 02 Mar 2009 - 20:13

Just take a cue from Hollywood guys and try to sell the same thing over and over again in different packaging. Usery at its finest.

#9 Julius Caro on 03 Mar 2009 - 09:03

It's sad that amazon gave in. Not that many people would have used the feature. Going all "music labels" will definitely not help the authors. They have to go with the flow!

#10 carmatic on 03 Mar 2009 - 14:56

uhhh if i was a writer and i had my book on amazon, i'd turn on the text to speech... so i get to sell more copies than those suckers who turned it off

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net