Using speech recognition and speech synthesis to learn English on iPhone / iPad. Aspects of copyright on techniques. My experience

Because of some things, hands sometimes fall, and there is no mood to do something further.

In my last article, I talked, in particular, about how my wife and I were learning English using mobile applications with speech recognition, and how effective this method was. Then we were engaged in the application Polyglot Sound. After that, I made some more similar applications on other methods, and they all have good reviews, people like it because they are simple and effective.

It would seem that everything is wonderful, but here it began ...

The fact is that the right holders of the techniques that have been freeing everywhere throughout the network for many years immediately woke up, began to stir and began to write angry letters threatening me.
')
The first were the British, the copyright holders of the Callan Method, which, they themselves say, is more than 60 years old (as far as I know, according to British law, copyright ceases to exist after 50 years, but oh well). They made claims to my Direct English applications for copyright infringement. I did not enter into the discussion, but simply offered them cooperation.

So that dear readers understand what is at stake, I’ll digress a bit to briefly describe how these applications appeared and what they are.

The classical Callan Method is the so-called direct language learning method. There is no translation, everything is only in English, so the student can be of any nationality. Leads a native speaker. All students are distributed on a small (pages 200) book. Teaching is conducted first in one book, which is run from beginning to end several times (usually 5-7), then next, and so on. At the beginning of the lesson, students repeat the words of the teacher and read the expressions from the book. Then in the form of a question - the answer is communicating with the teacher. Then - a little dictation. And again reading, communication in the mode of “short narrations of the teacher”, then in the format “question - answer”.

I worked on this method and got very good results in a relatively short time. The idea to make an application came to me when I was studying a book at home (I read it out loud). In the book, the student does not always understand how this or that word or phrase sounds, and you can’t hear yourself, whether you are talking or not. So I decided to make a talking and hearing book for homework. Just when I did it, I realized that I couldn’t go to classes with a native speaker, because the application had virtually completely replaced the teacher.

So back, as they say, to our British. I suggested that they use my application together, reasonably believing that when placing a link on their website it will be possible to get a good increase in installs. He expressed his willingness to discuss changes in the application at their request, as well as issues of profit sharing. They thought for two weeks, asked different questions, to which they received mostly affirmative answers from me. Then the solution: no! And the requirement to remove immediately, to sign an obligation not to transfer, not to publish, etc. If not, then the court, prison, Siberia.

Now I thought. No, the stories about how someone was arrested in Bangkok for violating their copyright did not scare me, but the prospect of being banned from Apple developer was scary. And I decided to withdraw them from sale.

Months, two applications were not available, and all this time I was gored by the thought. Not that the money, these applications brought me a little, since I did not promote them at all. Although, of course, this is also money, but for the most part time — more than a year of almost daily labor — and the undoubted effectiveness of applications tested on itself. I did not steal anything (the texts are freely available), I did not use a registered trademark. Why so immediately surrendered? And I again put the application in the App Store.

Two months later I received a letter from, as he called himself, the head of the online training unit Callan Online. The young man was extremely friendly and informed me that he had downloaded my applications, that he liked them a lot, that he had an offer to me and expressed a desire to chat with me on Skype. During the communication, he offered me cooperation, said in general what changes he would like to see in my applications so that they become official Callan Method applications and promised me to send a sample contract soon, where all the details of our future cooperation will be discussed.

I was waiting for a sample of the contract, and again I received an angry letter from those who had come in for the first time with the same demand to immediately remove applications from the App Store. A letter comes from him from a young man, in which he says that his colleagues are very angry and we need to remove the application from the sale in order for us to continue discussing our cooperation. Withdrew from the sale, informed him. He replies that I need to write to my colleagues about myself: who I am, where I live, etc., etc., I don’t remember to explain something to them. In short, I didn’t write them anything, he’s also silent to me. A month has passed, the second ... Silence. I posted my apps again. The month passed quietly.

The silence was broken by a certain Rachel from New York, a lawyer representing the interests of the copyright holder of the Pimsler method, for which I also made an application. The requirement is the same: remove immediately, sign the obligation not to distribute, not to transfer. Plus, provide a listing of the proceeds from the sale of this application. Otherwise, as usual: the court, prison, Siberia.

Also, for a short time I’ll distract from the description of the subject of the dispute, so that a dear reader can understand what is being said.

English by the method of Pimsler is a well-known audio course where the announcer speaks words and expressions and asks to repeat them, making pauses. In my application, I did not use their audio recording, but reproduced the text using standard voices (TTS), and the text is partially different from the audio recording. In the pauses, I used offline speech recognition, and the points for correctly recognized from three attempts +1, for three times incorrect -1. It turned out very gracefully, at least definitely better than the audio course. Here you can watch a demo video.

I sent her the same proposals that, they say, are open to dialogue, let's discuss, etc., etc. From there it is tough like this: in such and such a period that there should not be everything. Apple representatives write: decide with her, it is your responsibility (she pulls them too), I answer, they say, how to decide with her, if she doesn't want to talk at all? Well, today I wrote to Apple: the application is better than an audio course, I can, if necessary, change something in it, but I will not delete it.

Now I sit, waiting for what will be. I don’t understand one thing: I don’t use their audio recordings, I don’t use the registered Pimsleur trademark. What are their copyrights, words? Maybe someone had a similar experience, what will be what you think? Maybe I'm wrong and I should listen to them and remove the applications?