Kindles have always implemented DRM. We will all agree that DRM is a poor way to realize of a possible confused branch of copyright.
If you want to claim that DRM to limit digital copies of the text of a work is OK in a way that DRM to limit automatic audio-transformations of the work is not, I would like to hear your justification for that. I think that a much broader swath of modern interpretation of 'copyright' is primitive, scale-limiting, and counteproductive to its original intent, but there's nothing about this particular wrinkle that I find worrisome in a novel way. (and focusing on trivia to the exclusion of real problems can derail movements for years) Rob Myers writes: > The particular control being protested against here prevents the book > being read using text-to-speech. So even if it was true that some > forms of control of texts do not affect reading, this one definitely > does. No more than the Kindle in general 'prevents the book from being used to distribute digital copies of texts'. In particular, your Kindle does indeed parse and process text, just as it does connect to the internet and know how to transfer files. It simply doesn't let you run certain operations (such as 'copy this and file and email it to my aunt' or 'use the built in tts converter and read it out loud'). >> Considering how deeply many free software orgs have delved into >> various ways to modify and prohibit certain types of reuse, > > If they did so then their software would not qualify as free. I agree with your statement, under 'reasonable' definitions of "free". The FSF definnition does not qualify, for instance. To the contrary, copyleft, including FSF "freedom", requires the full strength of copyright-law-backed restrictions on reuse, for a minimum of life+70 years. Some copyleft supporters would use infinite-term copyleft if it were available. This imposing definition applied to a very unimposing word (and held up as the standard for free sharing of knowledge) is something I find rather offensive... > Both groups must consider copyright law as a factor in achieving their > desired outcome but free software does so in order to protect the > freedom to use software rather than to remove the freedom to read. > Protecting and attacking freedom are not the same thing. Free software protects the right of the author to indefinitely and granularly restrict future use of a work. It protects the freedom of the author at the expense of the freedoms of reusers. Designers of auto-text-to-speech restrictions protect the right of the author to granularly restrict future use of a work; again protecting this specific freedom of the author at the expense of the freedom of reusers. Defining the freedoms protected and those restricted in each situation is a good exercise; you may prefer one bundle of freedoms to the other, but they are similar in form. > Copyleft is not viral, nothing can catch a copyleft license through > mere proximity. Standard copyright and copyleft are both viral. You have to work at it to make a license that fits within Copyright that is /not/ viral. We can argue about what 'proximity' means, but in our gangly, adolescent concept of copyright, all of the following are sufficient proximity to pick up such a virus, [even though for instance many do not involve significant creative alteration]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sj/rights#Acting_on_a_work SJ On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Jay Sulzberger <[email protected]> wrote: > > Copyright law does not grant root on my machine to the author of > a file I have on my machine. > > DRM is theft. It is theft of my computer. > > Free software licenses deal with copying and distribution. Free > software license do not impede my use of my computer in my house. > > oo--JS. > > >> >> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Seth Johnson >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> (Join the Reading Rights Coalition in opposing the Authors' Guild's >>> attempt to claim the power to control your right to read with a device >>> that parses and processes text. Last Tuesday a coalition led by >>> concerned disabilities constituencies stood up for our right to own >>> and use fully functional computing devices. They are looking for >>> 10,000 signatures on their petition -- let's push it past that -- and >>> are planning to continue demonstrations, now on both coasts. I can't >>> gun outreach right now, but we can all forward the following links and >>> sign on . . . -- Seth) >>> >>> >>> Reading Rights Coalition (member orgs listed below): >>>> >>>> http://www.readingrights.org/ >>>> http://www.readingrights.org/take-action-now >>> >>> Petition (5,528 signatures at this point) (text pasted below): >>>> >>>> http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/We-Want-To-Read >>> >>> Call the Authors Guild: 1-212-563-5904 >>> >>> >>> Next Demo: >>> >>> LA Times Festival of Books >>> http://www.latimes.com/extras/festivalofbooks/ >>> Saturday April 25 and Sunday April 26 >>> Time: TBA >>> Location: UCLA >>> 405 Hilguard Avenue, >>> Los Angeles, CA 90095 >>> >>> The sign I chose :-) : >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.keionline.org/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/newyorker3-150x150.jpg >>> >>> Video of the April 7 Demo: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://abraham.omnicypher.com/2009/04/authors-guild-protest-thoughts-24-hours.html >>>> >>>> http://i.gizmodo.com/5202554/photos-and-video-from-the-national-federation-of-the-blinds-kindle-2-protest >>>> >>>> http://www.cnn.com/video/?JSONLINK=/video/ireports/2009/04/09/irpt.publisher.protest.cnn >>> >>> Accounts of the April 7 demo: >>>> >>>> http://www.keionline.org/blogs/2009/04/08/notes-from-kindle2-protest/ >>>> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/protest-kindle-drm >>>> >>>> http://www.betanews.com/article/Protesters-confront-Authors-Guild-over-Kindle-texttospeech/1239308961 >>>> >>>> http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/news_details/article/222/2009/april/10/cant-hear-what-others-can-see.html >>> >>> Authors' Guild: Protest "Unfortunate and Unnecessary": >>>> >>>> http://authorsguild.org/advocacy/articles/kindle-accessibility.html >>> >>> James Love cites statements of petition signatories: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-love/people-vs-the-authors-gui_b_183533.html >>> >>> >>> Chronology: >>> >>> Feb 9, 2009. Release of Kindle 2 >>> Feb 24, 2009. Roy Blount Jr., President of the Authors >>> Guild (AG) wrongly claims TTS would be an infringement >>> of copyright and a threat to audio books in a New York >>> Times op-ed. >>> Feb 27, 2009. Under pressure from the Authors Guild, >>> Amazon announced it would modify its system so authors >>> and publishers could turn off the TTS on a title by >>> title basis >>> The National Foundation for the Blind initiate a dialogue >>> with the AG >>> Authors Guild proposed a separate registration system >>> which was rejected by reading disabled persons >>> representatives >>> Authors Guild then proposed to make e-book TTS available >>> at additional cost >>> March 16 Letter from coalition to main 6 publishers >>> March 19, 2009. Amazon announced on its Kindle Blog that >>> it will make the menus and controls on the device >>> fully accessible to blind people >>> April 7, 2009. The Reading Rights Coalition kicks off its >>> campaign to reverse the stance of authors and >>> publishers who have disabled text-to speech with a >>> protest in New York city (see pictures at the end of >>> the post) >>> >>> Current Reading Rights Coalition Members: >>> >>> Please use the Contact Us form (http://www.readingrights.org/contact) >>> if your organization wants to join this effort. >>> >>> 1. AbilityNet >>> 2. American Association of People with Disabilities >>> 3. American Council of the Blind >>> 4. American Foundation for the Blind >>> 5. Arc of the United States >>> 6. Association of Blind Citizens >>> 7. Association on Higher Education And Disability >>> 8. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law >>> 9. Burton Blatt Institute >>> 10. DAISY Consortium >>> 11. Disability 411 newest! >>> 12. Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund >>> 13. IDEAL Group, Inc. >>> 14. International Center for Disability Resources on the Internet >>> 15. International Dyslexia Association >>> 16. International Dyslexia Association – New York Branch >>> 17. Jewish Guild for the Blind >>> 18. Knowledge Ecology International >>> 19. Learning Disabilities Association of America >>> 20. Lighthouse International >>> 21. LightHouse – San Francisco newest! >>> 22. National Association of Law Students with Disabilities >>> 23. National Center for Learning Disabilities >>> 24. National Disability Rights Network >>> 25. National Federation of the Blind >>> 26. NISH (formerly National Institute for the Severely Handicapped) >>> 27. National Spinal Cord Injury Association >>> 28. Smart Kids with Learning Disabilities >>> 29. United Cerebral Palsy >>> 30. Xavier Society for the Blind >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Text of the petition: >>> >>>> http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/We-Want-To-Read >>> >>> >>> We the undersigned insist that the Authors Guild and Amazon not >>> disable the text-to-speech capability for the Kindle 2. >>> >>> There are 15 million Americans who are blind, dyslexic, and have >>> spinal cord injuries or other disabilities that impede their ability >>> to read visually. The print-disabled have for years utilized >>> text-to-speech technology to read and access information. As >>> technology advances and more books move from hard-copy print to >>> electronic formats, people with print disabilities have for the first >>> time in history the opportunity to enjoy access to books on an equal >>> basis with those who can read print. >>> >>> Authors and publishers who elect to disallow text-to-speech for their >>> e-books on the Kindle 2 prevent the print-disabled from enjoying these >>> e-books. >>> >>> Denying universal access will result in more and more people with >>> disabilities being left out of education, employment, and the societal >>> conversation. We will all suffer from the absence of diverse >>> participation and contribution to the debates that occupy us as a >>> society. >>> >>> Furthermore, we oppose the Authors Guild demands that this capability >>> should be turned off because many more books would be sold if >>> text-to-speech remained available. Not only does this feature benefit >>> persons with disabilities, but it also helps persons for whom English >>> is not their native language. In an increasingly mobile society, >>> flexible access to content improves the quality of life for everyone. >>> >>> There can be no doubt that access to the written word is the >>> cornerstone of education and democracy. New technologies must serve >>> individuals with disabilities, not impede them. Our homes, schools, >>> and ultimately our economy rely on support for the future, not >>> discriminating practices and beliefs from the past. >>> >>> Thank you for your time and consideration in this important matter. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
