• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,183

Some of the world's largest book publishers have jointly filed a lawsuit against Amazon-owned audiobook company Audible today over a new, controversial speech-to-text feature the literary industry claims is a violation of copyright law.

The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District Court of New York, includes the Big Five: Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin Random House, and Simon & Schuster. It also includes San Francisco-based publisher Chronicle Books and Scholastic, the major children's publisher that owns publishing rights to Harry Potter and The Hunger Games. All seven plaintiffs are members of the Association of American Publishers.
Publishers are taking issue with Audible's new Captions feature, first unveiled last month and set to go live in September through partnerships with US public schools. The feature uses machine learning to transcribe spoken words into written ones, so users can read along while they listen to an audiobook. The issue, however, is that Audible is doing this based on audiobook recordings, which have separate licenses to physical books and ebooks. The company is not apparently obtaining the necessary licenses to reproduce the written versions of these works.
Because Audible is relying on artificial intelligence, it appears the company is trying to claim a distinction between a newly created piece of text composed using AI, based on an audio recording, and the potentially near-identical text version of the book the audiobook was created from. (As evidence that the text is generated on the fly, Amazon says its transcriptions may contain errors and are not intended to be complete recereations of the text version of a book.) At the time of its launch, Audible CEO Don Katz positioned Captions as an educational feature designed for schools, telling USA Today, "We know from years and years of work, that parents and educators, in particular, understand that an audio experience of well-composed words is really important in developing learners."

"Audible's actions — taking copyrighted works and repurposing them for its own benefit without permission — are the kind of quintessential infringement that the Copyright Act directly forbids," the complaint reads. "If Audible is not enjoined, Audible will take for itself a format of digital distribution it is not authorized to provide, devalue the market for cross-format products, and harm Publishers, authors, and the consumers who enjoy and rely on books."
"This is one of many lawsuits that will help define the future of intellectual property rights in the digital age. It raises major questions over what impact artificial intelligence, when it interacts with copyrighted material, will have on intellectual property rights," Sam P. Israel, a copyright attorney and founder of Sam P. Israel P.C., told The Verge over email. "Ultimately, unauthorized reproductions of copyrighted material, even when done unwittingly through the assistance of AI, will likely not pass muster in the courts."
The case happens to have a strong analog to a former Amazon publishing controversy a decade ago, when the company tried to launch a text-to-speech feature for its Kindle platform that would effectively do what Amazon Captions does today, but in reverse.

Publishers at the time were enraged, accusing Amazon of trying to trample on the nascent audiobook market and the licensing rights that publishers believed would help it become a thriving business. Amazon eventually caved in that regard, allowing publishers to disable the Kindle text-to-speech feature after a massive outcry from the US Authors Guild.


Short version - Audible can generate some readable text based on audio versions and publishers are mad because Audible only has rights to the audio version not a text version. Because it's an "ai" generated thing though it's not really clear to say the transcription is the same thing as the text version of the work. Video of the thing
 

Rincewind81

Member
Aug 20, 2019
138
Looks incredible useful to me for Audiobooks in English, which ist not my native language. Would I buy a book less because of this feature? Of course not.
 

Dascu

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,993
Copyright law is all about carving up every possible act of reproduction or distribution into a separate, legally licensable entity. Not surprised publishers would sue for this. Not sure if a judge would agree though.
 

NekoNeko

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
18,447
Complicated case but as a consumer it's really dumb that i can't read lyrics of songs in spotify or other streaming service because of rights issues.
 

Deleted member 23212

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
11,225
OK, I'm confused. Is it not normal for audio books to come with text versions? I always assumed that most people read the text in tandem with listening to the audio. Though I guess that sort of defeats the purpose, then...
 

Fliesen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,253
OK, I'm confused. Is it not normal for audio books to come with text versions? I always assumed that most people read the text in tandem with listening to the audio. Though I guess that sort of defeats the purpose, then...
Audio Books are super popular for commuters - like, you can listen to a lot of books during the 2x 1 hour drive each work day.
I think the use case where people read alongside listening to the audio book is actually really niche.
 

Cymbal Head

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,371
Even if we agree that an ML-generated text based on the recording isn't the same as the text of the book itself, it still qualifies as a derivative work and would need to be licensed from the copyright holders.

This is pretty transparently an attempt from Amazon to make an end run around having to double up on licensing costs. Given that it's ostensibly tailored toward helping kids learn to read, I would feel a lot of sympathy if it was almost any other company.
 

Peleo

Member
Nov 2, 2017
2,656
Audio Books are super popular for commuters - like, you can listen to a lot of books during the 2x 1 hour drive each work day.
I think the use case where people read alongside listening to the audio book is actually really niche.

It really depends on the country. Maybe in the US where most people drive, yes. But living in the UK, I'm almost always listening to either music or audiobooks on my commutes. An option to also follow the text-speech would be really helpful.
 

Arttemis

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
6,196
How the hell do audiobooks not have the right to the printed text? The fact that they're developing speech recognition software to rip the words is shady as shit, but having the written word legally separated from spoken is even more bizarre.
 

Fright Zone

Member
Dec 17, 2017
4,028
London
I'm with the publishers on this one, recreating the books text without a license isn't right, they should have to renegotiate a deal with the publishers to allow this feature.
 

ConanEd

Alt account
Banned
Dec 27, 2018
1,033
I have been using the Amazon developer text-to-speech service Polly to make "audiobooks" out of old Korean history and other college textbooks. These books will never be read by a human reader on audible so I am glad the option is there.

It still sound robotic but its still the best T2S option out there.
 

nekkid

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,823
I have been using the Amazon developer text-to-speech service Polly to make "audiobooks" out of old Korean history and other college textbooks. These books will never be read by a human reader on audible so I am glad the option is there.

It still sound robotic but its still the best T2S option out there.

Wrong way round. This is about speech to text.
 

Plotinus

Member
Oct 30, 2017
348
Eh, the publishers are probably right, and Amazon is evil too of course, but man, fuck the big five publishers. Ever since I read about their treatment of libraries vis-à-vis ebooks, I wish every evil upon them. First they started selling libraries self-burning ebooks, which expire after 2 years or 26 uses or whatever, thus ensuring that libraries can't build up a permanent collection of digital knowledge for the ages. Now they're talking about refusing to sell more than one ebook to each library system for eight weeks when a new book comes out, ensuring that libraries can basically advertise for them, but not actually provide access to the ebook for most of their patrons. The publishers' ebook divisions deserve every blow coming to them.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,789
It's an interesting case that mostly exists due to the complexity of copyright law. I'm on the side that Amazon should have the ability to do this. Imagine if you had just pure audio files and an app transcribed them (say it was originally meant for making podcasts accessible to deaf users), could book publishers sue? Well, if not then there should be no real difference adding it to an audiobook app as the only difference is the proximity to the product. They aren't selling the text, they are providing the means to transcribe it. Also, I disagree with the premise of charging for accessibility, everyone should pay the same price regardless of how they consume it, and those users must be allowed to enter the same door.
 

Greenpaint

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,884
If I write a book, can I control the formats it is published in? For example, if I wanted my book to be a physical production only, would an app that transcribes it into digital format be against copyright?
 

faceless

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,198
so listening to an audiobook and saying 'Alexa' and watching her live speech to text the audio on an Echo screen would is illegal?
 

BennyWhatever

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,776
US
I'm actually siding with the publishers, but I don't think they're necessarily in the right either.

Tech has evolved in such a way that this is an issue with accessibility. There needs to be an evolution where you can get an audiobook and follow along by reading digitally, sort of like a sing-a-long. It's something that could fairly easily be made (albeit time-consuming) but won't happen anytime soon due to legal reasons.
 

Mezentine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,969
Awful take. You should understand what the issue is and what the ramifications of it might be.
I understand that if Amazon wins this eventually it will trickle down to hurting independent authors and publishers who need every bit of control they can get, even if the heavyweights right now are the only ones who can afford to fight it out
 

The Albatross

Member
Oct 25, 2017
38,958
I suspect Amazon will just settle this and the publishers & Amazon will work it out. Amazon is too powerful, and book publishers are grasping to control a business that they've refused to adapt to user's requests on.

I'd also imagine many publishers aren't offering all of their titles with multi-faceted licenses, and that if they did then Amazon would pay the nominal fee for it if it were offered.

OK, I'm confused. Is it not normal for audio books to come with text versions? I always assumed that most people read the text in tandem with listening to the audio. Though I guess that sort of defeats the purpose, then...

Most people who listen to audiobooks do not do that. And it's not normal for audibooks to come with text versions.. Amazon just started doing this int he last year or so, but it's not common and just for some books. In the past you could get discounts for bundling audio+digital, and Amazon used something called 'WhisperSync' to keep them in sync, so if you listened to a book while driving home, you could pick up on your kindle where it left off. But only a small percentage of books supported it... they started promoting it more in the last year and bundling digital+audio since then but it's still not really common.

I'd imagine most people who listen to audiobooks are like me, listening to them while commuting, doing chores, exercising, etc. Although the transcription stuff with the new Kindle Oasis is pretty awesome.
 
Last edited:

samoyed

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
15,191
Don't know how to feel. The lawsuit is pretty bullshit on the other hand fuck Amazon.
 

lint2015

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,809
But... I imagine they already have the licence for the books for the Kindle store, so why not just bundle those with the Audible audiobook? Sounds like Amazon is being a cheapskate and skirting around paying royalties on the ebook to go with the audiobook, lol.
 

Border

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,859
Didn't the also sue over Kindles that had a text-to-speech feature? How did that turn out?