Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
They could insist on a signed contract, not a click-button agreement, that the person submitting the material has the rights to do so.
|
And people can lie. Contracts only let Amazon off the legal hook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
They could also assign someone on their staff to at least google for each book submitted--it won't fix the no-name/midlist author problem, but it'd allow them to say, "Gee, I wonder if Aaron Smith, P1R4T0RZ@freemail.com, really does have the rights to distribute the Harry Potter books?" |
While that works for well-known works, it fails for not-well-known works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
Right now, Amazon's legal stance is the same is thepiratebay's: "but they totally clicked on the button that said they had the right to upload this! And we'll remove it right away if we get DMCA complaints!"
|
Which, as someone has pointed out, is exactly what You Tube does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
Amazon's situation has the added twist that they're directly profiting from their lack of review of the content uploaded to their site.
|
My understanding is that if someone actually paid money for these, Amazon refunds the money and pulls the book off the Swindle... er... Kindle. So how is Amazon profiting?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
Obscure or questionable works aren't the issue here
|
Yes, it is the issue. Well known works are easy to identify. Obscure and questionable works are not.