[Athen] FW: House Subcommittee Vote Could End Booksfor the Blind.

[Terri Hedgpeth]

Thank you Pratik for this insight.  Interesting that this "Group" is
gaining monetarily from this conversion process. One wonders if there
wasn't a little coercion involved. "If you want our support in this
process ..." 
I feel like there are a big group of sheep just following what their
leader tells them to do, and they aren't questioning anything. 
I was pleased to see that John also questioned this whole situation.

Terri 
-----Original Message-----
From: athen-bounces at athenpro.org [mailto:athen-bounces at athenpro.org] On
Behalf Of Pratik Patel
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 9:10 PM
To: 'Access Technologists in Higher Education Network'
Subject: Re: [Athen] FW: House Subcommittee Vote Could End Booksfor the
Blind.

There is, sadly, blindness politics involved in the NLS development of
the digital delivery project.  In all this, NLS has decided that it will
not support one of the most important feature of a DAISY/DTB book, page
numbering.  I am beta testing the download service and it is certainly
lacking in that regard.  None of the books will be accompanied by text
either.  Unfortunately the design phase (or Frank Kert Cinke) determined
that adding page number navigation to newly developed DTB's would add
considerable cost to NLS's processes.  This was partly a decision made
by one of the blindness organizations, which has a strong monitary
interest in the NLS digital development.  the other organization lacks
leadership, the willingness, or the understanding  to do anything about
it.  I hope to change that soon.  Forgive me for being so cynical but
there are some very odd political things going on in New york with the
Higher Ed textbook legislation and the political nature of this fie
 ld is becomming more and more evident to me.  The more money is
involved, the more annoying this gets.

My apologies to those individuals who may belong to either of the
organizations.  My inditement does not reflect on your personal ability
or beliefs.

NLS is using a DRM system developed by the National Institute of
Science.  The current beta test of the download  delivery is taking
place by using an SD card and a modified Victor Classic desktop player.
Supposedly, NLS will be supporting manufacturers of other hardware
players--notice I do not say sofftware players--who wish to develop
support for NLS's DRM and proprietary flash-based cartredge.  NLS has
chosen not to support software players as they fully expect the DRM to
be broken in a short time after it's released.  NLS wants to show no
support for any such activity.  I love governmental agencies who are
afraid of their own shadows!  The players that NLS will be supporting
will not be able to playback DAISY material that does not comply with
the DRM technology.  I certainly hope this doesn't remain the case for
too long.  NLS plans to allow manufacturers to develop resellable
hardware cartredges for those individuals interested in the digital
download service.  The do
 wnload service will work in a similar manner to the Web braille service
currently provided to the patrons.

If NLS receives the partial funding promised by the current atmosphere
in Congress, it will not be the end of NLS or the program.  This funding
is to supplement  what NLS already receives on an annual basis.  The
move to digital will happen much more slowly than NLS predicted.  I'm
not suggesting that NLS should not receive its full funding as it has
requested.  But, certainly needs to explain some very important points
about their decisions and contracts.  I'm doing my part to get people to
move on this issue as I do believe that the agency should be allowed to
put its plans into effect at this stage. ... 

I could go on; but I know ya'all got better things to do than listen
to/read my rants.

Pratik


-----Original Message-----
From: athen-bounces at athenpro.org [mailto:athen-bounces at athenpro.org] On
Behalf Of Ron Stewart
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 11:52 AM
To: 'Access Technologists in Higher Education Network'
Subject: Re: [Athen] FW: House Subcommittee Vote Could End Books for the
Blind.

Morning,

Pullling out the soapbox here.  You can substitute Distance Educaition
for
print access in this conversation as well.

This is not just a blindness issue!  And as long as it is presented as
only
a VI/B issue it is never going to go anyplace. This is a VI/B, ADD/ADHD,
LD,
Cognitive Processing, Dyslexic, Developmental Disability, TBI, and
Psyciatric disability issue.  Did I miss any?  I do not even want to
being
talking about ESL and developmental Ed.  From my perspecitive, at its
heart,
it is another issue about inclusion and acceptance of folks with
disabilities in our global society.  This is not just about Blind
Readers
but the entire continuum of people with disabilities related to their
ability to effectively use print based materials.  If we look at all
students who would benefit from more accessible curriculum it could
easily
be as high as 25% of our students.  As long as the conversation remains
a
blind centric one the issues of inclusion and success are going to
remain on
the margins of the mainstream discussion.  

This is true for all topics of educational and societal reform for all
groups that are living on the margins of mainstream society.  In the
last
few years I have now been involved in more conversations that I care to
count on this topic and often one of the first questions that comes up
is
why can we not make any progress on this, and my typicall response is
until
you start to include the other 75% of folks with print related
disabilities
you will not.  These other groups are not typically as organized or as
vocal
as the VI/B groups and that contributes to the problem. Often times the
groups involved are so worried about protecting their turf and closed
agendas that it all gets lost in the real need of the people we are
dedicated to serving.

Being very involved in the whole Alt Format discussion on a global basis
this still does not effectively explain to me why the NLS felt it
necessary
to go out and develop propriety closed market technology. I was at a
DAISY
technical meeting this last week in Toronto and asked a question about
expansion beyond the focus on the special libraries to include the
educaitional space in the development of the specifications and it was
not a
place anyone else at the table seemed to want to go.  This kind of
thinking
promotes the possible irrelevance of the DAISY work as the mainstream
technology moves beyond it.  Don't get me wrong I am a strong advocate
for
DAISY and its impact on our students, but that is the result of closed
technology development especially in the current fluid and dymanic IT
world.

The compliance with closed format and protection of intellection
property do
not in any way require this kind of reader.  Since they published their
original strategic plan this has been a topic of conversation and
concern.
The more they went down the closed technology route the more it came up.
Nor does it explain why other national libraries are doing some of the
same
things, don't make questionable decisions unless your willing to deal
with
the consiquences. If the various development communities, both public
and
private, have good robust technologies in the marketspace then that is
the
first place agencies should look for solution.  Especially when they are
using public funds for the process.  

The DAISY PTDB2 standard for DRM in DAISY books provides for a very good
set
of protocols for insuring that Intellectual Property rights are
protected in
the development and distribution of DAISY materials.  With my work in
the
AHEAD E-Text  and NIMAS groups I have found that the discussion about
copyright is typically a slippery slope and straw man argument.  That is
why
we have made the decision to put it aside and focus on pragmatic
solutions
to the issues at  hand at least in the AHEAD work.  The topic does need
to
be revisited and the Chaffee exemption brought into the information age,
but
no one wants to open up the copyright law that is aware of all the
competing
issues most of which are not even related to access and disability.

When the government is trying to cut funds at every turn, it does our
effort
no good to shoot ourselves in the foot.  Secondly the House SubCommittee
is
not intending to End books for the blind they are doing our job and
asking
some hard questions about the appropriate use of public funds.  Do I
think
they should spend their time looking at pork elsewhere, of course, but
when
a government agency puts this kind of target on their back what should
they
expect.

Ron 

-----Original Message-----
From: athen-bounces at athenpro.org [mailto:athen-bounces at athenpro.org] On
Behalf Of Kestrell
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 10:28 AM
To: Access Technologists in Higher Education Network
Subject: Re: [Athen] FW: House Subcommittee Vote Could End Books for the
Blind.

Ron,

I have spoken to a number of people involved in special librariaries for
the

blind, and all of them insist that their players, hardware as well as 
software, must include DRM restrictions or the libraries will not be
able to

get the cooperations of publishers in distributing their work. My
impression

is that the state of the technology is dictated by the libraries'
lawyers, 
and that perspective dictates the design of the technology, the
distribution

method, and everything else involved in the design and distribution of
the 
books and the players.

There are lots of blind readers who comprehend that this is not the most

efficient or most economically sound method for doing things, but those 
dissenters seem tobe in the minority, or, at least, not on any of the 
committees that make the decisions.

Ultimately, I find it sadly ironic that the same government which is
taking 
the NLS to task for insisting on the more expensive "special formats" is
the

same government that has contributed so much to the arcane nature of the

copyright laws which have left the special libraries so paranoid about
being

held accountable for any infringement that they feel compelled to go
design 
these special players (read the copyright declaration on any of these
NLS or

RFBD or even Bookshare books and you will get an idea of how the format 
dictates the player and the distribution method, and even the
relationship 
witht he consumer).


Alicia/Kestrell
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Stewart" <ron.stewart at dolphinusa.com>
To: "'Access Technologists in Higher Education Network'" 
<athen at athenpro.org>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 5:26 PM
Subject: [Athen] FW: House Subcommittee Vote Could End Books for the
Blind.



>I have a tendency to stick my foot into sticky things and I also know

that

> if I respond on any of the blindness lists I would be tarred and 

> feathered.

>

>

> Based on my understanding from a recent trip to Washigton DC and a

couple 

> of

> conversations with legislative types, the number one issue for the

funding

> is the fact that the NLS did not use off the shelf technology or work

with

> any of the exsisting commercial solutions to build this reader.  This

has

> been an issue throughout the development process on this reader, and

to be

> honest I am not surprised by this at all.  It is becoming more and

more of

> an issues with federal funding of projects when the project goes off

and

> reinvents the wheel like this.

>

> Anybody want to help me become better informed on the whys and

werefores 

> of

> this.

>

> Ron Stewart

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: blindnews-bounces at blindprogramming.com

> [mailto:blindnews-bounces at blindprogramming.com] On Behalf Of BlindNews

> Mailing List

> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 4:43 PM

> To: Blind News

> Subject: House Subcommittee Vote Could End Books for the Blind.

>

> House Subcommittee Vote Could End Books for the Blind.

>

>

> PressRelease

> Author : National Federation of the Blind

> Earthtimes.org - USA

> Thu, 07 Jun 2007.

>

>

> On Wednesday, June 6, the House of Representatives Legislative Branch

> Appropriations Subcommittee voted to substantially underfund the Books

for

> the Blind program of the Library of Congress.

>

> Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind,

said:

> "Since 1931, Congress has consistently supported on a bipartisan basis

a

> national program of audio and Braille books for the blind, operated by

the

> Library of Congress. The blind of America are shocked and disappointed



> that

> a House subcommittee has callously disregarded our literacy needs

since

> literacy leads to independence. By appropriating only $7.5 million of

the

> $19.1 million needed for transition from antiquated analog cassette

tape

> technology to digital technology, the subcommittee has effectively

voted 

> to

> shut down the only public library available to blind Americans. The

audio

> books produced by the Library of Congress will be useless unless the 

> digital

> playback technology is provided for readers. The Talking Book program

is 

> at

> a crossroads because the analog tape used for the past thirty-six

years 

> has

> become obsolete and must be replaced for the program to continue. 

> Virtually,

> all government programs, except Books for the Blind, have converted to

> state-of-the-art digital communication technology at a cost of

billions of

> dollars to the taxpayers. Leaving the Books for the Blind program

behind 

> is

> unconscionable. Since it is early in the appropriations process,

however,

> Congress still has time to correct this grievous error. We therefore

> urgently appeal to the full House Appropriations Committee, the

members of

> the House of Representatives, and the United States Senate to provide

the

> full $19.1 million requested by the National Library Service for the

Blind

> and Physically Handicapped of the Library of Congress to begin

production 

> of

> digital talking books and players."

>

> The Talking Book program serves over 750,000 blind Americans,

including

> blind children and an ever-increasing number of older Americans who

are

> losing vision. The incidence of blindness is expected to increase as

the

> baby boom generation reaches retirement age. Therefore, the need for

this

> essential program will only increase.

>

> CONTACT: John G. Pare Jr., Director of Public Relations of the

National

> Federation of the Blind, +1-410-659-9314, extension 2371, Cell:

> +1-410-913-3912, jpare at nfb.org

>

> Web site: http://www.nfb.org/

>

>

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,118989.shtml

>

>

>

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL:

>

http://blindprogramming.com/pipermail/blindnews_blindprogramming.com/att
achm

> ents/20070608/aab3ec00/attachment.html

> --

> BlindNews mailing list

>

> To contact a list moderator about a problem or to make a request, send

a

> message to BlindNews-Owner at BlindProgramming.com

>

> The BlindNews list is archived at: http://GeoffAndWen.com/blind/

>

> To address a message to all members of the list, send mail to:

> BlindNews at blindprogramming.com

>

> Access your subscription info at:

>

http://blindprogramming.com/mailman/listinfo/blindnews_blindprogramming.
com

>

> To unsubscribe via e-mail: send a message to

> BlindNews-Request at BlindProgramming.com with the word unsubscribe in

either

> the subject or body of the message

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Athen mailing list

> Athen at athenpro.org

> http://athenpro.org/mailman/listinfo/athen_athenpro.org 



_______________________________________________
Athen mailing list
Athen at athenpro.org
http://athenpro.org/mailman/listinfo/athen_athenpro.org



_______________________________________________
Athen mailing list
Athen at athenpro.org
http://athenpro.org/mailman/listinfo/athen_athenpro.org


_______________________________________________
Athen mailing list
Athen at athenpro.org
http://athenpro.org/mailman/listinfo/athen_athenpro.org