Publishers Allege Copyright Infringement Against Audible Over New Audiobook Feature
That feature, called Audible Captions, is being challenged over copyright infringement by the publishers, who claim Audible is unlawfully reproducing the work of authors without permission.
August 23, 2019 at 04:54 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
A coalition of publishers is suing Audible, the Amazon-owned audiobook company, over a new feature announced last month that will display the text of a book to listeners while it's read to them by their device.
That feature, called Audible Captions, is being challenged over copyright infringement by the publishers, who claim Audible is unlawfully reproducing the work of authors without permission.
The lawsuit was brought Friday by the Association of American Publishers, which is represented in the litigation by Kirkland & Ellis. Maria Pallante, the group's president, said they chose to sue Audible after the company declined to address their concerns over the feature.
"In what can only be described as an effort to seek commercial advantage from literary works that it did not create and does not own, Audible is willfully pushing a product that is unauthorized, interferes and competes with established markets, and is vulnerable to grammatical and spelling inaccuracies," Pallante said. "It is a disservice to everyone affected, including readers."
Audible responded to the lawsuit in a statement by saying they were surprised by the implication that they haven't been speaking to publishers about the feature, which hasn't yet launched.
"We disagree with the claims that this violates any rights and look forward to working with publishers and members of the professional creative community to help them better understand the educational and accessibility benefits of this innovation," the statement from Audible said.
Attorneys for the publishers argued in the lawsuit that the new feature will infringe on their rights by allowing users to read along with the narrator without purchasing the text version of the book. Other features from Audible, which allow users to either read along with the narrator, or switch to a text-only version of the book, require a purchase of both the audiobook and the digital book.
The new feature is different. Audible Captions will display the text to users in real time while it's being read to them. The text will also be generated based on transcription technology from Audible, which the publishers say is far from perfect.
Audible has conceded as much to publishers, according to the lawsuit. Up to 6% of the text could include errors, such as transcribing the Yiddish phrase "mazel tov" as "mazel tough," the lawsuit said.
That's one of three reasons the publishers argued they would experience irreparable harm if Audible rolls out the new feature.
They argued that authors and publishers invest time and financial resources to ensure the quality of their work is presented to readers as it's written, free of errors. Having a feature that may display text that doesn't mirror what publishers or authors intended would devalue their reputation, the suit argued.
"The Distributed Text contains extensive errors that, of course, are not approved by the Works' authors or Publishers, and does not reflect Publishers' desired presentation," the lawsuit said.
It would also create a mechanism in which the new feature from Audible is directly competing with the product of publishers, both in digital and print form. Readers could see it as a replacement for the other features from Audible, which require users to purchase both the audiobook and a digital version of the book.
"Audible Captions, by contrast, does not require the purchase of an eBook, misappropriating the right to distribute text and depriving authors and Publishers compensation for distribution of their written works thereby lessening their incentive and ability to create and publish works for consumers," the lawsuit said. "It is hard to compete with free."
That leads into the third cause of harm alleged by the publishers, who claim the new feature would devalue the price point of their product. Consumers will no longer see the value in purchasing the physical or digital version of a book if they can read along with the audiobook for free, the publishers argued.
"The Copyright Act entitles Publishers and their authors to receive compensation for the text of Works, and Audible's infringement will cause them to lose unquantifiable revenues and good will and provide consumers with less incentive to participate in the properly authorized Audible Immersion market," the lawsuit said.
Audible Immersion is one of the features already authorized by the company. It allows users to read along with the text of a book while it's narrated, but requires a purchase of both products. Attorneys on the suit included photos of that and the new feature, which they've alleged will appear "remarkably similar" to users.
Along with the lawsuit Friday, attorneys for the publishers requested a hearing for a preliminary injunction against the feature. That hearing is scheduled for Sept. 5.
Seven publishers are named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit, including Chronicle Books, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan Publishing Group, Penguin Random House, Scholastic, and Simon & Schuster.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Religious Discrimination'?: 4th Circuit Revives Challenge to Employer Vaccine Mandate
2 minute read4th Circuit Revives Racial Harassment Lawsuit Against North Carolina School District
3 minute readDOJ, 10 State AGs File Amended Antitrust Complaint Against RealPage and Big Landlords
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Snapshot Judgement: The Case Against Illustrated Indictments
- 2Texas Supreme Court Grapples Over Fifth Circuit Question on State Usury Law
- 3Exploring the Opportunities and Risks for Generative AI and Corporate Databases: An Introduction
- 4Farella Elevates First Female Firmwide Managing Partners
- 5Family Court 2024 Roundup: Part I
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250