Engadget has an excellent interview with Paul Aiken, the executive director of the Author's Guild regarding their recent well publicized objections to the text-to-speech capabilities found in the Kindle 2, which can be found here
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/27/t...tor-of-the-au/
I say excellent, not because Paul Aiken did a good job of justifying the Author's Guild position, but rather, just the opposite. Engadget asks tough questions for which Paul was only able to offer clearly bogus answers. At one point, he tries to distinguish between the sale of an e-book that could utilize the text to speech capabilities of a laptop and one that would utilize the text to speech capabilities of the Kindle. The exchange is as follows:
Quote:
Q: This leads right into the next question -- you've got ebook sales happening right now on computers that can do text-to-speech. So are you going to go after Apple, after Microsoft?
A: Of course not. There's a fundamental difference between a text-to-speech on a general use machine, such as a Mac or a PC, and a dedicated device that is intended primarily for consuming books.
Q: What's the difference?
A: The difference is that there are audio rights involved in the books -- the Kindle converts every book that's sold into something other than just an ebook.
|
His argument is that because the Kindle can't do as much as a computer it makes is different. So, how many more features does the Kindle need before it is OK to have text to speech? His logic is faulty, his arguments are circular and his reasoning is suspect.