This can't possibly be true, can it?

[nashira]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I understand that one of the issues that blind users have with the Kindle is that the TTS only works on the text of the books, so they need a sighted person to select the book and play it. With the iPad, all the menus are read out too, so a blind user can use it entirely independently.

Didn't amazon say they were working on TTS menus for the visually impaired/blind, too? (It should have been there from the start, but better than never?)

[troymc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I understand that one of the issues that blind users have with the Kindle is that the TTS only works on the text of the books, so they need a sighted person to select the book and play it. With the iPad, all the menus are read out too, so a blind user can use it entirely independently.

That's interesting. I wonder how blind people navigate the touch screen. It's not like they can tap on icons which is the standard touch paradigm. Does the accessibility feature enable some sort of gesture controls for the menu system?


Troy

[HarryT]

The system is called "Voiceover". When you enable it, it changes the user interface such that you use a series of special "Voiceover gestures" to hear a visual description of what's on the screen, activate items, and so on. Eg, tapping an item speaks its description, while double tapping activates it.

[Freeshadow]

Ea especially the 2nd quote:

The treaty also creates a bad precedent by loosening copyright restrictions, instead of tightening them as every previous copyright treaty has done,

does tell imho enough

[J. Strnad]

The Moderator has it right. You can link to the article, and you can quote from it under the "fair use" provision, but you can't reprint it in whole. The amount you can quote through "fair use" is a bit arbitrary.

I suppose that the text to speech function might evolve in time to rival a dramatic reading from a good actor, perhaps even using a known actor's voice and inflection (which would be another lawsuit!), but as an author I just see it as adding to the value of the book and perhaps selling a book that otherwise wouldn't be sold.

I can see why audiobook publishers would be worried, but I don' t understand why authors should care.

[nashira]

Originally Posted by J. Strnad

The Moderator has it right. You can link to the article, and you can quote from it under the "fair use" provision, but you can't reprint it in whole. The amount you can quote through "fair use" is a bit arbitrary.

I suppose that the text to speech function might evolve in time to rival a dramatic reading from a good actor, perhaps even using a known actor's voice and inflection (which would be another lawsuit!), but as an author I just see it as adding to the value of the book and perhaps selling a book that otherwise wouldn't be sold.

I can see why audiobook publishers would be worried, but I don' t understand why authors should care.

A good audiobook > TTS, in my opinion. The technology will of course evolve but some people like the human aspect in audiobooks.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by J. Strnad

I can see why audiobook publishers would be worried, but I don' t understand why authors should care.

Presumably because they feel that it threatens separate sale of audio rights.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by webba84

Digital Rights:
Adobe EPUB eBook Rights
Copying not allowed
Printing not allowed
Lending not allowed
Reading aloud not allowed

Welcome to the world of DRM. It has little to do with preventing piracy, and everything to do with the Publishers trying to take away your rights.

Are those terms actually enforceable... probably not. They can make lots of claims in the fine print, that doesn't mean any of them are true. I'd like to see a Publisher try to argue in front of a judge that reading aloud is a copyright violation.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Are those terms actually enforceable... probably not. They can make lots of claims in the fine print, that doesn't mean any of them are true. I'd like to see a Publisher try to argue in front of a judge that reading aloud is a copyright violation.

Do you have IPR courts in the US, Shaggy? In the UK, and in fact, throughout the EU, cases such as that are heard in special courts in front of a judge who is an expert in the field of IPR law, precisely because one can't expect a "normal" judge to be familiar with it.

[Logseman]

Do you have IPR courts in the US, Shaggy? In the UK, and in fact, throughout the EU, cases such as that are heard in special courts in front of a judge who is an expert in the field of IPR law, precisely because one can't expect a "normal" judge to be familiar with it.

It is quite curious that everywhere where the State wants to have a tight leash on people's liberties, special courts and specialised (aka, insider-defending) judges are needed. We had that stuff delivered to us in Spain, in the ol' times of dictatorship. The potentially conflictive matters such as labor and "public order" crimes were judged by separate courts.