[free-sklyarov] Topicality

[Seth David Schoen]

David Haworth writes:

> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 09:20:29AM -0400, Roger Sperberg wrote:
> > 
> > Long before there was the capability for computers to read a text aloud to
> > you, the audio rights for books were separated out as a revenue source for
> > publishers.
> 
> The right to publish in any format is a matter for contract
> negotiation between publisher and author. That includes digital
> format. The existence of versions of the work in audio format
> should not and does not have any bearing on whether I can have
> the book read to me, either by a human from my own paper edition
> or by my computer from the electronic edition if it has that
> capability.
> 
> The "read aloud" permission is a construct invented by the
> publishers (and ebook reader manufacturers) and has
> no legal standing in copyright law. Yet it is protected
> by laws intended to protect copyrights.

I agree: "audio rights" are found nowhere in copyright law, but are a
feature of publishing contracts.  

In the computer world, we're now seeing a strange expectation that
everyone is expected to abide by contracts to which they are strangers.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the DVD Video technology's sad
history: various interests formed elaborate contracts and then
complained, in effect, that _other people_ were violating those
contracts.

First sale itself undermines to some extent publishers' ability to
subdivide copyright privileges.  For example, one press may have the
right to sell a new book in the U.S., another press in Canada.  These
rights were obtained by contract, using the powers of the copyright
holder under the Copyright Act.

However, if I buy a copy from the first press, and then take it to
Canada, I may sell it there, even though supposedly I don't have
"Canadian" rights to sell the book.  Actions like that can undermine
publishers' intentions about who'll sell what where.  That doesn't
mean that those actions violate copyright law.

If the point is just that publishers had a contractual obligation to
_try_ to stop people from using text-to-speech software, I'm still not
so sympathetic.  I'd still expect the publishers not to ask for the
DMCA to back up arbitrary provisions of their private contracts.

(My father is a book dealer who sells used and rare books, from all
over the world, to all over the world.  He works with publishers and
respects copyrights, but I think it's very fortunate that, when he
gets something in stock, he doesn't have to ask anybody's permission
to resell it, or worry about whether he's violating some marketing or
distribution agreement signed by people he's never met.)

-- 
Seth David Schoen <schoen at loyalty.org> | Its really terrible when FBI arrested
Temp.  http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | hacker, who visited USA with peacefull
down:  http://www.loyalty.org/   (CAF) | mission -- to share his knowledge with
     http://www.freesklyarov.org/      | american nation.  (Ilya V. Vasilyev)