When Amazon's new wireless reading device, the Kindle 2, was released last week, it was the first time many publishers heard about the feature. Amazon chose to keep the text-to-speech feature built into the Kindle 2 a secret from much of the publishing sector.
Following the debut of the Kindle 2, the 9,000-member Authors Guild claimed text-to-speech created a derivative work and violated copyright. Paul Aiken, the guild's president, said many publishers were also angered over the speech function, adding that Amazon never consulted beforehand with either of those groups. Amazon responded on Friday by giving publishers the ability to disable the text-to-speech feature on any title they choose.
What Amazon should have done was discuss the feature ahead of time. If that would have taken place, none of this would have happened. Instead it appears Amazon was basically saying, “We’re Amazon, we can do what we want!”
My question is, as a PR professional for Amazon, what do you think they should have done?
- Travis Francis
I completely agree. This needed to be adressed before anything was done. No one has the right to do "whatever" they want, especially not billion dollar companies.
ReplyDelete--Porsche
As an Amazon fan and someone who plans to but the Kindle, I am very disappointed. Amazon should have consulted the publisher about this speaker. Audio definitely takes the work and changes it to a new form, which as far as I know is a copyright violation. That like if there was a song that was turned into a book and the musical artist was given no heads up. Amazon is in the wrong.
ReplyDelete-Nicole