The success of the AAP in its case against Audible’s audiobook ‘Captions’ may have long-lasting influence on issues of AI and intellectual property.
Use ‘bribery’ or ‘extortion,’ not ‘quid pro quo,’ writes Roxana Robinson to the ‘Times,’ as the Authors Guild slams Justice’s letter to Hachette.
Advocacy organizations for publishers, authors, and copyright applaud the 410-to-six bipartisan vote in the House for the long-promoted CASE Act.
This week’s court papers, attorneys for the publshers say, have surprised them as the audiobooks retailer says it’s ‘unable to reach … a path forward.’
More than 100 pages of court filings precede a hearing expected this week in the US publishers’ lawsuit of Amazon’s Audible.
The IBPA has filed a complaint with Audible on behalf of 27 independent publishers that object to Audible Captions functionality.
The court action filed by the Association of American Publishers a week ago has led to a hold on deployment of ‘Audible Captions,’ per new court papers.
The Authors Guild’s new statement sees unsettled business between Cengage Unlimited and authors over the publisher’s new usage-based royalty payments.
AAP chief Maria A. Pallante calls Audible’s ‘Captions’ an effort ‘to seek commercial advantage from literary works that it did not create and does not own.’
The writers’ action against the agency practice of ‘packaging’ teams for studios escalates to federal court with antitrust and anti-racketeering charges.