Universities Agree Not To Promote Kindle DX because of Blind Students

[Babbles]

Here is the CNET article:

Three universities will refrain from using Amazon's Kindle DX in the classroom under terms of deals announced Wednesday by the U.S. Department of Justice.
In separate pacts, Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Pace University in New York City, and Reed College in Portland, Ore., agreed that they "will not purchase, recommend, or promote use of the Kindle DX, or any other dedicated electronic book reader, unless the devices are fully accessible to students who are blind and have low vision."
The Justice Department's civil rights division has been exploring whether Kindles and other e-readers violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. Last year, two organizations representing the blind--the National Federation of the Blind in Baltimore and the American Council of the Blind in Arlington, Va.--sued another school, Arizona State University, after it and other universities announced pilot projects to use the handheld device in classrooms..

CNET
ABC News
ZDNet
Information Week
San Francisco Chronicle

A handful of universities have been using the Kindle in a college setting as part of a pilot program. I am a graduate student at Case, one of the schools mentioned in the lawsuit, but our program was not part of the pilot study. When I first heard about our school being part of the pilot program I was excited. I really thought this is the way that universities will be going (e-textbooks) or at least added as an option for students.

This lawsuit makes me mad as hell and I find it totally mind-boggling. People with impaired vision should be totally supporting the use of a Kindle. Such a device like this with variable contrast and font size as well as text-to-speech functionality should be an ideal option for those students who would otherwise need a customized textbook (e.g. large font). The reduced weight and reduced price tag should be a great benefit to everybody.

It appears to be that their major shit-fit is that the Kindle menus do not yet have speech guidance. However it seems as if these self-centered bone-heads do not understand what "pilot study" means, not to mention the fact that a "normally" visioned student could use one should be irrelevant as currently there are resources for blind people. Perhaps universities should get rid of university owned parking lots as that is a benefit for normally sighted people. Universities support all sorts of programs that individuals with disabilities do not necessarily participate in; e.g. sports (severely physically disabled), music (deaf), visual studies (blind). Furthermore I wonder if this can be extended to online non-Kindle e-books? I have instructors who recommend course packets that are an online subscription; could that be construed as discriminatory against blind people?

I am both mad and confused that this technology can have so much potential benefit for university students but some numbskulled group managed to cry foul and get a lawsuit going.

Any thoughts here?

 

[cmdrdredd]

If you're blind how do you read text books? I understand "low vision" but they mention blind...

IMO this is just as dumb as CSU deciding that after so many years of it being a non-issue that they will try to ban concealed carry for students. The fact that people don't know who is armed and not deters more potential violence and crimes than you can imagine.

 

[Patranus]

Problem solved
http://tactileresponse.com/refreshable-braille-display.html

 

[cmdrdredd]

Problem solved
http://tactileresponse.com/refreshable-braille-display.html

Now build that into the kindle and we'll talk. Nice idea tho. Is the DX a touchscreen?

 

[Sclamoz]

If you're blind how do you read text books? I understand "low vision" but they mention blind...

Brail and books on tape.

My first thought when reading the OP is why can't the Kindle do text to speech? A device like this would be hugely beneficial to the blind. Apparently the Kindle has the capability but there are copyright concerns, apparently the publishers feel letting the Kindle do text to speech will hurt the audio book market lol.

http://www.slashgear.com/publishers-hit-kindle-text-to-speech-kill-switch-1443870/

Amazon have begun to implement a remote kill-switch that removes text-to-speech functionality from their Kindle ebook reader. A byproduct of the Author’s Guild TTS controversy, the system allows publishers to disable text-to-speech on a title by title basis; as of this week, TTS has been removed from over 40 works including five of the top ten Random House best-sellers in the Kindle store.


The argument from the Author’s Guild is that, by artificially reading out any ebook, Amazon are impinging on audio-book rights that the copyright for Kindle texts does not cover. Amazon, meanwhile, maintain that it is a legal use of the texts, but implemented the kill-switch nonetheless to make rightsholders ”more comfortable”.

 

[Patranus]

Just another example of the government stamping on the needs of the majority out of the *feelings* of a super minority.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Do they even make much from audio books? I mean revenue wise?

Just another example of the government stamping on the needs of the majority out of the *feelings* of a super minority.

Oh I know what you mean. Just like airport security. "you can't search them because that's profiling". Why can't they have balls like Jack Bauer "Yes it is profiling, but it works so unless you have a better idea get out of the way."

A little brash but really, a little inconvenience for the safety of many.

 

[ProgressiveAthe]

Here is the CNET article:

CNET
ABC News
ZDNet
Information Week
San Francisco Chronicle

A handful of universities have been using the Kindle in a college setting as part of a pilot program. I am a graduate student at Case, one of the schools mentioned in the lawsuit, but our program was not part of the pilot study. When I first heard about our school being part of the pilot program I was excited. I really thought this is the way that universities will be going (e-textbooks) or at least added as an option for students.

This lawsuit makes me mad as hell and I find it totally mind-boggling. People with impaired vision should be totally supporting the use of a Kindle. Such a device like this with variable contrast and font size as well as text-to-speech functionality should be an ideal option for those students who would otherwise need a customized textbook (e.g. large font). The reduced weight and reduced price tag should be a great benefit to everybody.

It appears to be that their major shit-fit is that the Kindle menus do not yet have speech guidance. However it seems as if these self-centered bone-heads do not understand what "pilot study" means, not to mention the fact that a "normally" visioned student could use one should be irrelevant as currently there are resources for blind people. Perhaps universities should get rid of university owned parking lots as that is a benefit for normally sighted people. Universities support all sorts of programs that individuals with disabilities do not necessarily participate in; e.g. sports (severely physically disabled), music (deaf), visual studies (blind). Furthermore I wonder if this can be extended to online non-Kindle e-books? I have instructors who recommend course packets that are an online subscription; could that be construed as discriminatory against blind people?

I am both mad and confused that this technology can have so much potential benefit for university students but some numbskulled group managed to cry foul and get a lawsuit going.

Any thoughts here?

You should read the facts before you made your thread. They are upset because the writers and amazon have made it so almost all of the books available on kindle DO NOT allow you to use the text to speech function, and so the kindle is useless to the blind.

 

[cmdrdredd]

You should read the facts before you made your thread. They are upset because the writers and amazon have made it so almost all of the books available on kindle DO NOT allow you to use the text to speech function, and so the kindle is useless to the blind.

This is because of the audiobook market giving them a hard time about text to speech though right?

 

[ProgressiveAthe]

This is because of the audiobook market giving them a hard time about text to speech though right?

Authors make big money off audio books since they sell for like $40+, when the book cost $15.

 

[soccerballtux]

I wouldn't want the Kindle for my books anyways. Kills the 2nd hand market for books; what are they going to let me resell the digital version of the book I bought? Yeah right...
Having the physical book is nice for taking notes or making dogears. Is the Kindle going to be working in 30 years when I need to come back and look over some stuff again? Is it going to work when I drop it from 5 feet onto the floor? When it gets stolen what happens to my books on it? Is it going to work if we have thermonuclear war and the EMP blasts wipe out all electronic devices? [ok, joking on the last one]

I might buy one of these if it hit $50, but not before. The digital books have no resale value and, the important books at least, are rarely cheaper than the printed ones-- charge for the "convenience" of having a digital copy. Meh... :/

 

[Babbles]

You should read the facts before you made your thread. They are upset because the writers and amazon have made it so almost all of the books available on kindle DO NOT allow you to use the text to speech function, and so the kindle is useless to the blind.

The federation has said that while it appreciates the Kindle's text-to-speech feature, the "menus of the device are not accessible to the blind...making it impossible for a blind user to purchase books from Amazon's Kindle store, select a book to read, activate the text-to-speech feature, and use the advanced reading functions available on the Kindle DX."

Officials say the most current version of the Kindle has a text-to-speech function, but the device's menu does not, so it is impossible for blind students to navigate through different electronic books or within an electronic book.

Actually maybe you want to try reading it again yourself, chief.

They are pissed because the navigational menus are not speech based. Which, could *maybe* be a valid concern, however it is certainly not worth it to levy a lawsuit to inhibit pilot programs to determine the usefulness of this product for the majority of university students.

If "normally" sighted students used the Kindle, then the absolutely worse case scenario is that visually impaired students would continue to use their traditionally modified textbooks (likely case is that they could too use the Kindle). However because of this dumbass lawsuit, normally sighted students are robbed of that opportunity to explore this option, and visually impaired students are still stuck with their modified resources.

 

[Babbles]

I wouldn't want the Kindle for my books anyways. Kills the 2nd hand market for books; what are they going to let me resell the digital version of the book I bought? Yeah right...
Having the physical book is nice for taking notes or making dogears. Is the Kindle going to be working in 30 years when I need to come back and look over some stuff again? Is it going to work when I drop it from 5 feet onto the floor? When it gets stolen what happens to my books on it? Is it going to work if we have thermonuclear war and the EMP blasts wipe out all electronic devices? [ok, joking on the last one]

I might buy one of these if it hit $50, but not before. The digital books have no resale value and, the important books at least, are rarely cheaper than the printed ones-- charge for the "convenience" of having a digital copy. Meh... :/

That may be your personal preference, and that should remain so. However if somebody wants to purchase and e-book reader, then they too should be able to exercise their personal preference.

 

[ProgressiveAthe]

Actually maybe you want to try reading it again yourself, chief.

They are pissed because the navigational menus are not speech based. Which, could *maybe* be a valid concern, however it is certainly not worth it to levy a lawsuit to inhibit pilot programs to determine the usefulness of this product for the majority of university students.

If "normally" sighted students used the Kindle, then the absolutely worse case scenario is that visually impaired students would continue to use their traditionally modified textbooks (likely case is that they could too use the Kindle). However because of this dumbass lawsuit, normally sighted students are robbed of that opportunity to explore this option, and visually impaired students are still stuck with their modified resources.

You should read up on the Text to Speech function. It is DISABLED for most books.

Example: http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/05/15/random-house-shuts-down-kindle-text-to-speech-for-their-titles/

Here random house has disabled text to speech for nearly all of their titles on kindle.

 

[Babbles]

You should read up on the Text to Speech function. It is DISABLED for most books.

Example: http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/05/15/random-house-shuts-down-kindle-text-to-speech-for-their-titles/

Here random house has disabled text to speech for nearly all of their titles on kindle.

Do you have brain damage?

I quoted two articles which specifically mentioned that the text-to speech was functional. Hell the group that brought the lawsuit stated that they appreciate that the books had text-to-speech; it was the menus that did not.

Additionally this pilot study was specific for university textbooks. I have never seen Random House publish academic textbooks - maybe they do, but I've never seen it.

 

[ProgressiveAthe]

Do you have brain damage?

I quoted two articles which specifically mentioned that the text-to speech was functional. Hell the group that brought the lawsuit stated that they appreciate that the books had text-to-speech; it was the menus that did not.

Additionally this pilot study was specific for university textbooks. I have never seen Random House publish academic textbooks - maybe they do, but I've never seen it.

NO, your article just says it has text to speech capabilities, but this ability is DISABLED for nearly every published book.

Random House publishes works liturature, and I am sure the program would have been expanded to liturature books, which TEXT TO SPEECH IS DISABLED. These groups that sued have been protesting the kindle for months now because text to speech is disabled on must works of liturature, it has been on the news time and time again.

 

[sandorski]

Seems to me that the Pilot Program is working as intended. The issue just came up real early. Once the Menus are made Accessible, there will no longer be a problem. For this issue anyway. Patience.

 

[drebo]

Just another example of the government stamping on the needs of the majority out of the *feelings* of a super minority.

It's not even that. The "blind" thing is just a coverstory as it makes no sense what so ever.

The people really behind this is the textbook publishing racket in the US. The Kindle vastly eats in to their margins and they don't want it. They've been fighting digital distribution of textbooks for almost a decade. This is just the latest scapegoat.

 

[drebo]

Just another example of the government stamping on the needs of the majority out of the *feelings* of a super minority.

It's not even that. The "blind" thing is just a coverstory as it makes no sense what so ever.

The people really behind this is the textbook publishing racket in the US. The Kindle vastly eats in to their margins and they don't want it. They've been fighting digital distribution of textbooks for almost a decade. This is just the latest scapegoat.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

There are people with neurological conditions which leave them unable to read. We need to outlaw text.

Ok, I can see if the university mandates a kindle, or only uses material available for it. What did blind people do before this gizmo was released? Rub the pages real hard? No, they had a special edition or some other means of dealing with it. As long as the material the Kindle has can be learned by the same means, for all practical intents a Kindle IS a book. Neither can be "read" by someone with limited vision.

 

[sandorski]

There are people with neurological conditions which leave them unable to read. We need to outlaw text.

Ok, I can see if the university mandates a kindle, or only uses material available for it. What did blind people do before this gizmo was released? Rub the pages real hard? No, they had a special edition or some other means of dealing with it. As long as the material the Kindle has can be learned by the same means, for all practical intents a Kindle IS a book. Neither can be "read" by someone with limited vision.

Given that these devices should pretty much work fine for the Blind, I think they just decided to tip the Balance a bit to remove the need for separate accommodations.

 

[kedlav]

I'm not really sure how this rates as an issue. Having worked at Ohio State's Dept. of Disability Services before I graduated in 2006, we read books onto tape for the visually impaired. How is this going to stop that from happening? These departments exist for a reason...

 

[ichy]

I'm not really sure how this rates as an issue. Having worked at Ohio State's Dept. of Disability Services before I graduated in 2006, we read books onto tape for the visually impaired. How is this going to stop that from happening? These departments exist for a reason...

Probably scumbag lawyers who make a living off of BS ADA cases. These are the same bottom feeders who drive small restaurants and shops out of business because they don't spend a year's revenue on making their facilities perfectly handicapped accessible.

 

[soccerballtux]

That may be your personal preference, and that should remain so. However if somebody wants to purchase and e-book reader, then they too should be able to exercise their personal preference.

That's nice. Except these are universities we're talking about. They would charge you extra tuition, then hand you the Kindle. So I can't exercise personal preference.

 

[Slew Foot]

Some people have trouble breathing, we should outlaw breathing for everyone.