http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksWAYDnFozU

“The blind and print-disabled have for years utilized text-to-speech technology to read and access information,” says Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind. “As technology advances and more books move from hard-copy print to electronic formats, people with print disabilities have for the first time in history the opportunity to enjoy access to books on an equal basis with those who can read print. Authors and publishers who elect to disable text-to-speech for their e-books on the Kindle 2 prevent people who are blind or have other print disabilities from reading these e-books. This is blatant discrimination and we will not tolerate it.”

The Reading Rights Coalition represents people who can’t read print and will be holding a protest on April 7,  over the threatened removal of the Kindle 2 text-to-speech feature, The protest will take place at the Authors Guild headquarters in New York City at 31 East 32nd Street  from noon to 2:00 p.m.. Amazon.com was praised when it first introduced the Kindle 2 in early February with a text-to-speech feature for all books sold on the Kindle 2. But then Amazon.com caved to the demands of the Author’s Guild that it remove the text-to-speech feature from books whose authors don’t want the feature enabled. The Authors Guild compared the feature to “audio books”, which is a big market for many authors.

Meanwhile, the Reading Rights Coalition is calling the upcoming dismantling of the Kindle 2 text-to-speech feature an act of discrimination against the blind, people with dyslexia, seniors losing their vision, and people with spinal cord injuries.

“Removing the text-to-speech features closes the door on an innovative technological solution that would make regular print books available to tens of thousands of individuals who are blind or visually impaired,” says Mitch Pomerantz, president of the American Council of the Blind

Amazon.com has been facing many battles over its Kindle 2 since releasing in in February 2009. Earlier this month they had a lawsuit filed against them by Discovery Communications, claiming Amazon.com is infringing on their ereader patent.  Amazon.com hasn’t given any indication that it will reverse its agreement with the Authors Guild and as a result, both Amazon.com and the Authors Guild are targets of the Reading Rights Coalition.

“Knowing full well that not everyone can see, the Authors Guild wants the right to be seen, but not heard,” says James Love, director of Knowledge Ecology International. “By bullying Amazon to change the technology of Kindle 2, the Authors Guild will either deny access to people who are disabled, or make them pay more. By attacking disabled persons in this way, the Authors Guild is attacking everyone who would otherwise benefit from the contributions this community has the potential to offer.”

The Reading Rights Coalition  includes: American Association of People with Disabilities, American Council of the Blind, American Foundation for the Blind, International Dyslexia Association, Association on Higher Education and Disability, Learning Disabilities Association of America, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, National Disability Rights Network, Burton Blatt Institute, Digital Accessible Information System (DAISY) Consortium, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), IDEAL Group, Inc., International Center for Disability Resources on the Internet, International Dyslexia Association–New York Branch, Knowledge Ecology International, National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Federation of the Blind, NISH, and the National Spinal Cord Injury Association.

Patagonia Kindle 2 Case at Amazon.com

Buy a Kindle 2

It’s unknown if Amazon would consider this the Kindle 3 or if it would be a vertical market product with its own name (i.e. Kindle Touch) and branding.

–

Note: The Rumors section of the Amazon Kindle 2 Reviews website should be taken with a grain of salt. Items are put in the Rumors section that do not contain at least two verifiable sources. As such, rumors could contain inaccurate information.