If I buy the audio book does it make sense that I am allowed if I want to write on a piece of paper what I hear?
How about type it?
How about using some voice-to-text software that I have?
How about type it?
How about using some voice-to-text software that I have?
And to think amazon is "surprised and disappointed by this action" does not seem the case. They are definitely trying to make themselves look charitable because of "educational purpose".
The original creator has issues with it. And if I was the content creator, I probably would have.
Why would you consider pen+pencil and free app to transcribe audio to text different in terms of copyright infringement? Does Audible charge you more to use this feature?
What I see here is an attempt to dictate ways in which I can use book I already purchased - i.e. limit my rights.
What I also see: a bunch of companies that are trying to squeeze more juice from the market, which they are not even willing to serve in the first place, because they, being experts in the book market, couldn't figure out that market needs this feature, while a bunch of IT geeks, did.
It just was never enforced because how would that be possible.
But now with these ML/NN/AI tech approaches products are coming out at scale. If I write an open source package and give it away for free and it takes text and produces audio performances from it, that’s fair use, I think.
Amazon commercializing is a different thing, but unless the publishers are going to sue parents from using text to speech and speech to text utilities on stuff they bought we’re going to get into an interesting legal area.