Showing posts with label Boing Boing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boing Boing. Show all posts

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Good words on the economic climate in the U.S.

A new radio spot paid for by the Koch brothers extols the spirit of cooperation that led unionized workers at Harley-Davidson to take a pay cut for the good of the company. What it doesn't mention is the $6.5 million paycheck the company's CEO handed himself that year.
--Cory Doctorow on Boing Boing

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Copyright Law - A Quagmire

The Internet has created a real firestorm over copyright law. Bloggers, such as myself, often copy clips from other publications and use them to initiate a story, or to confirm facts or opinions being offered. It's not likely, without the fair use provision of copyright law, that blogs like mine would exist. I don't have enough original thoughts - nor do I do enough original research - to warrant publishing a blog on a regular basis without the use of material I find elsewhere.

Occasionally copyright claims are filed against blogs that clip information. Google got sued by book publishers when they tried to provide a database of hundreds of thousands of books by scanning them into their servers. Even though only small clips would be provided by a Google search for text in the books, the publishing companies still felt that having all of the books scanned into one database threatened their ability to make a living by selling the books.

Now a new copyright battle is brewing - this time over Amazon's production of the second-generation Kindle which will use text-to-voice software to read electronic books aloud. This is sort of funny - but also a bit threatening. If the publishers win, in the future you can't be sure that when you buy a book you really own it.

From Boing Boing (click to read the whole article - it's interesting).

Over on Boing Boing Gadgets, our Rob has the news that the always-retrograde Authors' Guild believes that Amazon is violating copyright law by shipping a device that can read text-files aloud using text-to-speech, because "that's an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law."
-----
Forget for a moment that text-to-speech doesn't copy an existing work. And forget the odd notion that the artificial enunciation of plain text is equivalent to a person's nuanced and emotive reading. The Guild's claim is that even to read out loud is a production akin to an illegal copy, or a public performance.

If a machine reading a book creates a derivative work, why not a person reading a book?