1alexa_d
I understand publishers having a problem with TTS readers potentially eating into their audiobook sales, and as one who definitely appreciates a well-produced audiobook, I want that market to stay as robust as possible. However, I can't help but get a little annoyed that publishers keep blocking TTS functionality on the Kindle, especially since most of my eBooks are small press/indie authors who will pretty much never have the budget to produce an audiobook, or public domain books which have no rights exclusivity but may not always have a (decent) audiobook version. The idea of being able to switch between reading and listening depending on what I am able to do at that moment is incredibly appealing, and so I started seeking out third party apps that could do it.
So far, I've been using Evie on my phone, and it does the main thing I wanted it to do (aside from just TTS) in that is it has different voices to choose from. The other ones I tried could only seem to use the default Google/Android TTS voice, though that is what it uses for the female American English voice, which makes me think the other voices are hiding somewhere in my phone but that don't show up in the Settings menu for some reason? I don't know. I have no real complaints so far, except it does occasionally just stop working after prolonged use, but it usually just takes a full close/re-open to start working again, and it remembers your last place pretty well. It can't read .mobi (Kindle) files, but I've got plenty of .epub books for it to read.
Has anyone else tried any TTS eBook apps that they would or would not recommend?
So far, I've been using Evie on my phone, and it does the main thing I wanted it to do (aside from just TTS) in that is it has different voices to choose from. The other ones I tried could only seem to use the default Google/Android TTS voice, though that is what it uses for the female American English voice, which makes me think the other voices are hiding somewhere in my phone but that don't show up in the Settings menu for some reason? I don't know. I have no real complaints so far, except it does occasionally just stop working after prolonged use, but it usually just takes a full close/re-open to start working again, and it remembers your last place pretty well. It can't read .mobi (Kindle) files, but I've got plenty of .epub books for it to read.
Has anyone else tried any TTS eBook apps that they would or would not recommend?
2gilroy
The reason that publishers keep blocking the TTS feature has nothing to do with budgets for production. It has to do with rights. Specifically rights that the author has granted to allow an audio book to be made.
A print book and an audio book are two different sets of publishing rights, and as such two different income streams, for authors. The TTS feature would be like asking a person in a normal job to work 40 hours, but only get paid for 20.
If you want a decent audio book from the independent publisher/indie author, you should check with them regarding when they are going to sell the rights.
A print book and an audio book are two different sets of publishing rights, and as such two different income streams, for authors. The TTS feature would be like asking a person in a normal job to work 40 hours, but only get paid for 20.
If you want a decent audio book from the independent publisher/indie author, you should check with them regarding when they are going to sell the rights.
3alexa_d
>2 gilroy: I mean, the rights/income continuum does impact the whole budget issue, but I never said that budgets were the reason TTS keeps getting blocked. I said the sales/income stream thing was why it keeps getting blocked. Budgets are simply the reason why many of the eBooks I personally own will never get audiobooks.
Personally, I would think that TTS would fall under fair use-- I'm not about to write up a whole law review article on it (though I imagine several people already have), but technically every bit of writing you read in your daily life is copyrighted. I own the copyright to this comment and the original post. But anyone could use a screen-reader/TTS to have this page read out to them, and I assume you'd agree that that's an acceptable use of the technology. But the fact that there's no market for professionally recorded forum posts, while not totally irrelevant to whether TTS is fair use, still doesn't change the fact that TTS of these posts amounts to a transformative use of my copyrighted material without my permission. Meanwhile, any Kindle or other distributor-side TTS would require purchase of an authorized eBook; simply having a machine read it to a bona fide purchaser for their own private use and unfixed to any other media (as in, TTS doesn't generate separate audio files as it reads), that's the sort of thing fair use has historically covered. Like how media companies originally argued that VCR recordings infringed their copyrights, but it was eventually deemed fair use. The fact that home video and now streaming are their own income streams with their own licensing/rights structure does not change the fact that VCR/DVR recordings are still protected as fair use. Authors can't stop you from reading books aloud to your kids either.
If you want a decent audio book from the independent publisher/indie author, you should check with them regarding when they are going to sell the rights.
Again, this is where budgets are relevant. It requires that an audiobook studio believe that the rights are worth licensing in the first place. Which means they think that the license fee to the author/publisher and all production and distribution costs can be earned back (and then some) in a reasonable amount of time. Books which have under 20 copies cataloged on this site (which several of my eBooks do) are not going to be licensed for audiobooking any time soon.
I understand the publishers'/authors' arguments about audiobook licensing rights, but I don't believe that TTS actually violates them. They are still able to license those rights to a production company, who will hire professional voice actors to perform careful readings of the text, who will, among other advantages to TTS, not get tripped up by how any algorithm handles punctuation or typos, etc. The real argument is that TTS will eat into the revenue audiobooks could otherwise earn, which will theoretically devalue the rights and disincentivize production companies from actually licensing them. They're probably even right about that. But publishers have also said that about libraries having new books available (especially on library eBook borrowing platforms) as soon as they're released to the public. Is the bite out of their revenue worth blocking what is a helpful technology (especially for low-income and disabled readers) from allowing more people to consume more books? And again, what about public domain books to which none of these arguments apply?
Like I said, a well-produced audiobook is a work of art in its own right, and I want them to remain a viable and robust income stream for authors and publishers. Hell, I've bought several audiobooks that I had no previous interest in except that any one of my many favorite voice actors was doing the reading. But my overworked, ADHD ass is also super grateful that I found an app that will read me books that have legally come into my possession on my commute, while I cook dinner, and during my nightly hygiene routine.
Personally, I would think that TTS would fall under fair use-- I'm not about to write up a whole law review article on it (though I imagine several people already have), but technically every bit of writing you read in your daily life is copyrighted. I own the copyright to this comment and the original post. But anyone could use a screen-reader/TTS to have this page read out to them, and I assume you'd agree that that's an acceptable use of the technology. But the fact that there's no market for professionally recorded forum posts, while not totally irrelevant to whether TTS is fair use, still doesn't change the fact that TTS of these posts amounts to a transformative use of my copyrighted material without my permission. Meanwhile, any Kindle or other distributor-side TTS would require purchase of an authorized eBook; simply having a machine read it to a bona fide purchaser for their own private use and unfixed to any other media (as in, TTS doesn't generate separate audio files as it reads), that's the sort of thing fair use has historically covered. Like how media companies originally argued that VCR recordings infringed their copyrights, but it was eventually deemed fair use. The fact that home video and now streaming are their own income streams with their own licensing/rights structure does not change the fact that VCR/DVR recordings are still protected as fair use. Authors can't stop you from reading books aloud to your kids either.
If you want a decent audio book from the independent publisher/indie author, you should check with them regarding when they are going to sell the rights.
Again, this is where budgets are relevant. It requires that an audiobook studio believe that the rights are worth licensing in the first place. Which means they think that the license fee to the author/publisher and all production and distribution costs can be earned back (and then some) in a reasonable amount of time. Books which have under 20 copies cataloged on this site (which several of my eBooks do) are not going to be licensed for audiobooking any time soon.
I understand the publishers'/authors' arguments about audiobook licensing rights, but I don't believe that TTS actually violates them. They are still able to license those rights to a production company, who will hire professional voice actors to perform careful readings of the text, who will, among other advantages to TTS, not get tripped up by how any algorithm handles punctuation or typos, etc. The real argument is that TTS will eat into the revenue audiobooks could otherwise earn, which will theoretically devalue the rights and disincentivize production companies from actually licensing them. They're probably even right about that. But publishers have also said that about libraries having new books available (especially on library eBook borrowing platforms) as soon as they're released to the public. Is the bite out of their revenue worth blocking what is a helpful technology (especially for low-income and disabled readers) from allowing more people to consume more books? And again, what about public domain books to which none of these arguments apply?
Like I said, a well-produced audiobook is a work of art in its own right, and I want them to remain a viable and robust income stream for authors and publishers. Hell, I've bought several audiobooks that I had no previous interest in except that any one of my many favorite voice actors was doing the reading. But my overworked, ADHD ass is also super grateful that I found an app that will read me books that have legally come into my possession on my commute, while I cook dinner, and during my nightly hygiene routine.
4gilroy
>3 alexa_d: Fair use? NO! Not in the least. If you turn an entire book into text to speech, you've now created an audio book, which is a breach of the rights the publisher has access to. Because that algorithm doesn't store a file doesn't mean that an audio book hasn't been created. And no, fair use covered limited amounts of text being used for the sake of reviews or educational material. Quoting an entire book is NOT fair use.
The only way it is allowed is for a disabled person unable to read using either braille or eyes.
A writer doesn't need to get a massive production or a professional to create an audio book. There are plenty of programs out there that can allow a self published author to create their own audio books. No need to get anyone else to do their work. Since that was a reason they went into self publishing in the first place.
The only way it is allowed is for a disabled person unable to read using either braille or eyes.
A writer doesn't need to get a massive production or a professional to create an audio book. There are plenty of programs out there that can allow a self published author to create their own audio books. No need to get anyone else to do their work. Since that was a reason they went into self publishing in the first place.
5alexa_d
>4 gilroy: How is TTS reading a whole book any different from DVR'ing a whole movie or TV series? They both create for private use a version of a product that the copyright holder has the exclusive right to produce/license commercially. The "limited excerpts for review or educational purposes" rule only applies to publications, not private use. You are also allowed to rip DVDs and CDs to your computer as a backup copies of whatever media you purchased on said discs.
The only way it is allowed is for a disabled person unable to read using either braille or eyes.
Blindness is far from the only disability that impairs reading. Dyslexics benefit from audiobooks. And more broadly, people like me whose brains won't let them sit still for more than five minutes at a time also benefit greatly from audiobooks. Publishers blocking DRM'd eBook TTS for everyone means that disabled people ALSO can't use it. This is what DRM always does: it hurts the legitimate consumer while having no effect on the pirates or "grey-area" 3rd parties.
And NONE of the foregoing applies to works in the public domain, which makes up a sizeable portion of my Kindle library. Amazon won't implement TTS for just public domain works because that's not where the money is, which means that the publishers holding back Kindle TTS are ALSO hindering 100% incontrovertibly legal, non-infringing uses of the technology.
The only way it is allowed is for a disabled person unable to read using either braille or eyes.
Blindness is far from the only disability that impairs reading. Dyslexics benefit from audiobooks. And more broadly, people like me whose brains won't let them sit still for more than five minutes at a time also benefit greatly from audiobooks. Publishers blocking DRM'd eBook TTS for everyone means that disabled people ALSO can't use it. This is what DRM always does: it hurts the legitimate consumer while having no effect on the pirates or "grey-area" 3rd parties.
And NONE of the foregoing applies to works in the public domain, which makes up a sizeable portion of my Kindle library. Amazon won't implement TTS for just public domain works because that's not where the money is, which means that the publishers holding back Kindle TTS are ALSO hindering 100% incontrovertibly legal, non-infringing uses of the technology.
6Crypto-Willobie
I've never used or heard a TTS audio, but -- depending on what kind of book is involved -- I can't imagine that the quality of the 'performance' would be any good, or even adequate. A significant pct of audios read by professional or semi-professional readers are botch jobs, so how could something produced by a template (or whatever you'd call it) be well done?
I suppose a brief, straightforward, informational text, requiring no particular nuance, might pass muster, but otherwise...
I suppose a brief, straightforward, informational text, requiring no particular nuance, might pass muster, but otherwise...
7gilroy
>5 alexa_d: It all goes back to rights. Does the publisher have the rights to create an audio book? Does the author intend to sell the rights to the audio? You are conflating DRM (which really should be Device Rights management) with Contractual Rights. DRM only talks about can I buy a kindle book and be able to read it on a Kobo or a Nook. Contractual Rights deals with what has been released to be used by the copyright holder.
Never been allowed to rip DVDs. There's programs that get around it, but never allowed. Technically, CDs changed because people forced them to, not because it was allowed.
But as long as you want to use other media as an example (but their use clauses are different from books) let's use that DVD. A DVD is a purchase of a copy of a movie, just like with a copy of the book. For private use, which means you can play it in your home, or another's home, for no fee and as long as the crowd remains small. The minute you take it to a conference room or theater, or charge money to watch it with you, the rights that you are granted to that movie CHANGE. You are now giving a public performance. You owe the production company a fee. And depending on number of showings and the crowd size, that fee can be anywhere from a few hundred to a 10s of thousands of dollars.
Streaming is different because you are paying a monthly rental fee to help pay for the rights granted to the company. This is where a large majority of your payment to Netflix, Hulu, and cable go. This is a big reason why they don't want people sharing passwords. It affects their ability to pay the fee. The reason why someone like Disney can charge lower is they are the copyright owner and as such don't have to pay a third party for their contract talks.
Books are different, in that they do not have "public performance" issues. Reason: Public performance of a book is usually the movie, the tv series or the audio book.
In every case, with regard to books, even in public domain, a publisher of that copy has the right to say "I want to make an audio book." or "I have an audio book." so I do not grant TTS. It's early, so I haven't checked my Kindle this morning, but there is a TTS feature on private documents. Certain books might also have it, but I've not dug. If an indie author still wants to make an audio book, they can tell Amazon "No, I don't want TTS turned on." As I've said from first post: It's not up to KINDLE whether that is there or not. It's also not a DRM issue.
Honestly, if you talk to the Library of Congress (actually, most local libraries can help get this set up), they have audio books for the disabled. I believe you need to fill in some paperwork, but it allows people to check out the audio of books (1000s more than most libraries) when you can't read physical. So using public domain books as an example of why TTS should be allowed doesn't work either. They do exist.
Seeing as you don't want to hear any of my comments, however, this will be my last post regarding this.
Never been allowed to rip DVDs. There's programs that get around it, but never allowed. Technically, CDs changed because people forced them to, not because it was allowed.
But as long as you want to use other media as an example (but their use clauses are different from books) let's use that DVD. A DVD is a purchase of a copy of a movie, just like with a copy of the book. For private use, which means you can play it in your home, or another's home, for no fee and as long as the crowd remains small. The minute you take it to a conference room or theater, or charge money to watch it with you, the rights that you are granted to that movie CHANGE. You are now giving a public performance. You owe the production company a fee. And depending on number of showings and the crowd size, that fee can be anywhere from a few hundred to a 10s of thousands of dollars.
Streaming is different because you are paying a monthly rental fee to help pay for the rights granted to the company. This is where a large majority of your payment to Netflix, Hulu, and cable go. This is a big reason why they don't want people sharing passwords. It affects their ability to pay the fee. The reason why someone like Disney can charge lower is they are the copyright owner and as such don't have to pay a third party for their contract talks.
Books are different, in that they do not have "public performance" issues. Reason: Public performance of a book is usually the movie, the tv series or the audio book.
In every case, with regard to books, even in public domain, a publisher of that copy has the right to say "I want to make an audio book." or "I have an audio book." so I do not grant TTS. It's early, so I haven't checked my Kindle this morning, but there is a TTS feature on private documents. Certain books might also have it, but I've not dug. If an indie author still wants to make an audio book, they can tell Amazon "No, I don't want TTS turned on." As I've said from first post: It's not up to KINDLE whether that is there or not. It's also not a DRM issue.
Honestly, if you talk to the Library of Congress (actually, most local libraries can help get this set up), they have audio books for the disabled. I believe you need to fill in some paperwork, but it allows people to check out the audio of books (1000s more than most libraries) when you can't read physical. So using public domain books as an example of why TTS should be allowed doesn't work either. They do exist.
Seeing as you don't want to hear any of my comments, however, this will be my last post regarding this.
8micheal5NM
That's awesome when you can download some ebooks in FB2 or PDF formats, and then use "text-to-speech" feature for listening to it. Usually, when I'm going on a long vacation, I prefer to visit this useful reference of online ebooks library, where I can download any book, and then simply make it's being playing by "text-to-speech" feature.
