From: David Wright <gymnastdave_at_sbcglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:40:49 -0600

If an application existed which allowed
a user to create his or her own voice
fonts in a fairly simple manner, whoever
own ATANDT could still use the voices
they are used to. This might be one
option for solving the dilemma.
Dave

> ----- Original Message -----
>From: Bluechip <csbluechip_at_gmail.com
>To: Glenn at home
<GlennErvin_at_cableone.net>, Rockbox
<rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se
>Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:11:21 +0000
>Subject: Re: Voices

>Big list of speech synths.
>http://www.student.oulu.fi/~vtatila/revi
ews_of_speech_synths.html#neospeech
>Neospeech is quite incredible!

>I post this link in case there are other
companies which we may care to
>approach to tide us over to the time
when we can generate our own speech
>and all these legal problems disappear.

>BC

>At 18:25 30/01/2006, you wrote:
>>If the terms state that we may not
distribute the WAV file, specifically,
>>then that may be an out here, since I
can, for example, set my Text Aloud to
>>convert to MP3.
>>Glenn
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Jerry Van Baren"
<gerald.vanbaren_at_smiths-aerospace.com
>>To: "Rockbox" <rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se
>>Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 12:13 PM
>>Subject: Re: Voices


>>Michael E. DiFebbo wrote:
>>> Jerry Van Baren wrote:
>>>> It is a licensing issue, not a
copyright issue. In order to install
>>>> and run the software, you must agree to
their licensing terms. One of
>>>> the terms of that license is that you
may not redistribute the sounds
>>>> produced by that software.

>>>> Neither the text nor the resulting
speech is copyrighted, but
>>>> distributing the speech is still
disallowed.

>>> I'm curious about how you reach the
definitive conclusion that these
>>> voices are not subject to copyright.
Section 102(a)(7) of the U.S.
>>> Copyright Act expressly includes "sound
recordings" in the "works of
>>> authorship" that can be protected by
copyright under the act.

>>> Michael E. DiFebbo

>>OK, you got me on that one. It probably
is copyrighted as well (by
>>which party, I don't know).

>>Wizzard clearly asserts the claim that
you need a license to
>>redistribute the .wav files, see the
excerpt below. I didn't see any
>>assertion of a copyright claim on the
output .wav file. For legal
>>advice, ask your lawyer. If you wish to
discuss the licensing terms,
>>start an email dialog with Wizzard.

>>YMMV, IANAL, TTFN,
>>gvb

>>http://www.wizzardsoftware.com/docs/offe
rings.pdf

>>Wizzard Licensing Model Overview

>>Our Offerings are designed to for
Developers to speech enable their
>>applications by adding automatic speech
recognition and /or
>>text-to-speech to their products, and
our Licensing Agreements are
>>modeled for this environment. SDKs are
available with "internal usage
>>only" licensing, and may be purchased at
the Wizzard Website or through
>>Wizzard Sales. Any deployment or
distribution of speech technologies or
>>wavefiles requires additional licensing,
with terms and prices based on
>>volume and the environment (runtime,
port, wavefile). For quotes and/or
>>information regarding term/conditions,
please contact Wizzard Sales.
Received on 2006-01-30