Among those who've run afoul of strict IP protection laws are the disabled, specifically the blind.  Although the Chafee Amendment allows for the reproduction and distribution of audio copies, known as “phonerecords,” of published literary works for the visually impaired, the amendment limits the authorization to “nondramatic” works.   Dan Pescod, Vice-Chair of the World Blind Union Global R2R Campaign, reports in The 'Right to Read' - Why a WIPO Treaty for Print Disabled People? that only about 5% of books are available in a format accessible to the world's 314 million visually impaired.   Organizations attempting to provide dramatic works in the alternative formats often find that gaining necessary permission is slow or impossible. 

For the visually impaired, the complications created by intellectual property laws are not limited to genre choice.  In response to a U.S. Copyright Office Inquiry, the Comments of the American Library Association, Association of College and Research Libraries and the Association of Research Libraries outline several problems with the present system.  While many agencies strive to provide the visually impaired with accessible materials, this population does not enjoy the ready availability of materials; there is a delay in accessing these materials that others do not suffer.  Even when the materials are available, they are not always available in the preferred format, as some prefer Braille and others, audio.  Furthermore, adaptations provided by public libraries and universities often require equipment available only at that facility. 

Those allowed to create adapted materials find themselves frustrated by trade laws.  The United States does not allow export of these materials, for example.  The World Blind Union has proposed to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) a treaty that would ease the exchange of books for the blind.  The United States, however, among other developed countries, opposed the treaty. 

Some intellectual property owners have fought accessibility for the disabled as well.  Some authors have demanded that their works be distributed without assistive technologies, as “sound-proof books.”  Early in 2009, The Authors Guild forced Amazon to disable the text-to-speech feature in their heavily-promoted Kindle, claiming that it breached copyright law.  Their complaint was that people without disabilities could listen, too.  Amazon now leaves it to the copyright owner to determine whether or not the work is available in audio form.