This will be a wonderful accessibility feature, and if I were an Android developer and a publisher approached me to request that their app could opt-out, my rep

This will be a wonderful accessibility feature, and if I were an Android developer and a publisher approached me to request that their app could opt-out, my reply would be "pound sand." I actually think it's pretty ridiculous how many folks are seemingly on the publishers' side here in the comments. Let's frame it a different way: * Manufacturers of reading glasses don't require a license to transform works a user consumes into a format more accessible to them * A built-in magnifier app does not require a license to transform works a user consumes into a format more accessible to them * A built-in audio transcriber - and this seems to be the sticking point somehow? - should not require a license to transform works a user consumes into a format more accessible to them A lot of people are getting caught up on this whole "whether it creates a derivative work" thing. And my point is: yes it does, of course it does, any method of consumption effectively does, and these should be explicitly allowed in the name of doing what's right for users and accessibility. Whether it's built in to the app or built in to the OS, the same transformation is happening. And it's such an essential freedom to be able to consume media that you purchased in an accessible form that I could really give a rat's ass if the publisher thinks that you're only "licensed" to consume that media when it's emitted as sound waves from their approved audio source.