Kindle Deleted Ayn Rand Content - Page 16

HansTWN · 07-13-2009, 02:43 AM

You cannot take legal possession of stolen goods, even in good faith. That is true for everything except money. Amazon, of course, took the easy way out. Great service would have been to secure legal copies for all buyers (even if they were more expensive). But I am sure you also gave them the right to delete items directly from your Kindles somewhere in the fine print. It stinks, but I am sure it is legal. You can always vote with your feet and buy something else.

HarryT · 07-13-2009, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You cannot take legal possession of stolen goods, even in good faith. That is true for everything except money. Amazon, of course, took the easy way out. Great service would have been to secure legal copies for all buyers (even if they were more expensive).

There are no legal eBooks of these texts - that's the point.

Riocaz · 07-13-2009, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You cannot take legal possession of stolen goods, even in good faith. That is true for everything except money.

That may be true in Taiwan. I don't believe this to be true in the UK at least not completely.

(Our old neighbour had his car stolen, he later recognised the car with new number plates etc etc and reported it to the police. However the new owner had purchased it in good faith and my parents friend was told to claim against his insurance as the new owner was the legal owner, despite the car being stolen property).

PKFFW · 07-13-2009, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riocaz

That may be true in Taiwan. I don't believe this to be true in the UK at least not completely.

(Our old neighbour had his car stolen, he later recognised the car with new number plates etc etc and reported it to the police. However the new owner had purchased it in good faith and my parents friend was told to claim against his insurance as the new owner was the legal owner, despite the car being stolen property).

Sounds like you got some wack laws in the UK then.

Here in Australia it wouldn't matter at all if you purchased "in good faith". If it is stolen property to begin with it would be taken from you and returned to the original owner.

Cheers,
PKFFW

HarryT · 07-13-2009, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Sounds like you got some wack laws in the UK then.

Here in Australia it wouldn't matter at all if you purchased "in good faith". If it is stolen property to begin with it would be taken from you and returned to the original owner.

Cheers,
PKFFW

That is also the law in the UK. If you buy a car and it turns out to be stolen, the original owner will get it back. The only exception to this would be if the insurance company had already settled the claim, in which case the vehicle would belong to the insurance company.

Riocaz · 07-13-2009, 09:58 AM

See thats the way I would have expected it to go, and the reason it stuck in my mind was that it was the exact opposite.

I even remember that the insurance claim had been submitted but wasn't complete and that he contacted the insurance company to put it on hold while the police investigated. The police confirmed that it was definatly his car but because it had been bought and sold again the "owner" of the car kept it.

HarryT · 07-13-2009, 10:46 AM

I don't know what happened in your case, Lee, but I am absolutely 110% certain that British law, in the normal case, is as I describe it. That's why, when buying a secondhand car, it's so important to do an ID check on it, because should it turn out to be stolen, you will, in the normal course of events, lose your money.

Shaggy · 07-14-2009, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harmon

All of that is true, but the legal principle which applies is that when you buy something, you can only acquire the property rights that the seller has to sell.

The seller of infringing property by definition does not have any ownership rights in the property. The copyright laws place the ownership in the copyright owner as long as we are within the copyright period. So the seller can't sell you what he doesn't have, no matter that you paid him for it.

Obama can't sell you my car. You can pay him for it if you want, but it matters not. It's still my car, not yours.

This is not really debatable as a legal matter. It's fundamental to property law.

Laws and analogies for physical products don't apply. Copyright and IP laws are fundamentally different. This has nothing to do with property rights.

Shaggy · 07-14-2009, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harmon

Think of it this way. You hire a guy to fix your bathroom plumbing. You give him the key to your house, and go out for a cup of coffee. Meanwhile, the plumber spots a book in the bathroom you borrowed from his brother a couple of years ago, and decides to pick it up and take it back to his brother.

Again, that's a physical property example, which has nothing to do with IP.

Quote:

Same thing here. When Kindle owners turn on Whispersync, they are giving Amazon the keys to the Kindle. When Amazon deletes the Rand book, they are returning it to the brother.

The customer didn't borrow it, they bought it. Big difference.

Shaggy · 07-14-2009, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You cannot take legal possession of stolen goods, even in good faith.

There is no such thing as "stolen goods" in copyright law. You're confusing physical property laws with IP laws. There are completely different things. IP received from an unauthorized distributor has nothing to do with possession of stolen goods.

Quote:

But I am sure you also gave them the right to delete items directly from your Kindles somewhere in the fine print. It stinks, but I am sure it is legal.

Just because something is stated in a contract does not necessarily mean it is legal. If it is illegal for Amazon to remove your eBooks, then it does not matter what the fine print of a contract says, it is still illegal. Amazon can put in the fine print of the contract that if I don't pay them, they have the right to break my legs. That doesn't mean they can actually do it.

HansTWN · 07-14-2009, 06:38 PM

We can argue about this all day, but we won't really know until the courts decide. If you so thoroughly believe that there is a case, go ahead and sue them. If you weren't among the victims locate one and work with him or her.

wodin · 07-14-2009, 07:44 PM

Have we beat da buggah

to death yet?

Harmon · 07-14-2009, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Again, that's a physical property example, which has nothing to do with IP.

It's an "analogy"! Not an "example."

(I'm either going to have to stop using analogies, or drop a disclaimer in whenever I use one.)

Harmon · 07-14-2009, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Laws and analogies for physical products don't apply. Copyright and IP laws are fundamentally different. This has nothing to do with property rights.

IP means "intellectual property."

Further, the copyright statute specifically refers to copyright as having an "owner." If something can have an owner, it's property.

And finally, the law does not consider ownership of property in terms of its physical existence. The law considers "property" as what lawyers refer to as "a bundle of rights." Rights in property are the same sort of thing as copyright & IP. That is, they are legal concepts, which can be apportioned in different ways.

For example, you can have a "life estate" in a house. That's the right to live in it, or to sell the right to live in it, measured by the length of your life. This is an example of property being apportioned in time.

Or you might be a landlord, who rents an apartment to the renter. The renter has the exclusive right to the use of the property over a period of time. Except that the landlord might retain the right to entry for stated purposes, such as repair & maintenance. That part of the apportionment over time is reserved.

Or take money. Our parents might put a million bucks into the bank for you and me to share the income on - I get the first thousand dollars of interest, you get the next five hundred, and we divide the rest (they always liked me best.) Here, ownership of the income stream has been apportioned, apart from ownership of the capital.

Or take copyright. I can sell you the right to use my copyright in limited ways - say, only in a movie as background music, or only for playing on the radio. Dividing it by usage. Same way as I can sell you the right to grow corn on my land, but not wheat.

Property, legally considered, consists of nothing more than ownership of different kind of rights, and copyright is merely one kind of such property right.

The very purpose of copyright law is to quantify the nature and duration of the ownership of the property called "copyright."

griffonwing · 07-14-2009, 10:47 PM

Mom always liked you best? I wondered why you had bacon, eggs, toast and OJ for breakfast and all i got was water and oatmeal.

07-14-2009, 06:38 PM	#236
HansTWN Wizard Posts: 4,538 Karma: 264065402 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Taiwan Device: HP Touchpad, Sony Duo 13, Lumia 920, Kobo Aura HD	We can argue about this all day, but we won't really know until the courts decide. If you so thoroughly believe that there is a case, go ahead and sue them. If you weren't among the victims locate one and work with him or her. Last edited by HansTWN; 07-14-2009 at 06:40 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ayn Rand - 100% Micropay Rebate at Fictionwise	KarenH	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	19	10-01-2009 08:58 PM
Ayn Rand available on the Sony Site	SHOECHICK	Reading Recommendations	21	09-28-2009 11:54 AM
Ayn Rand	desertgrandma	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	114	06-30-2009 11:00 PM

07-13-2009, 02:43 AM	#226
HansTWN Wizard Posts: 4,538 Karma: 264065402 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Taiwan Device: HP Touchpad, Sony Duo 13, Lumia 920, Kobo Aura HD	You cannot take legal possession of stolen goods, even in good faith. That is true for everything except money. Amazon, of course, took the easy way out. Great service would have been to secure legal copies for all buyers (even if they were more expensive). But I am sure you also gave them the right to delete items directly from your Kindles somewhere in the fine print. It stinks, but I am sure it is legal. You can always vote with your feet and buy something else.

07-13-2009, 09:58 AM	#231
Riocaz Fulfilled but not by iRex Posts: 932 Karma: 286846 Join Date: May 2006 Location: London Device: Far too many	See thats the way I would have expected it to go, and the reason it stuck in my mind was that it was the exact opposite. I even remember that the insurance claim had been submitted but wasn't complete and that he contacted the insurance company to put it on hold while the police investigated. The police confirmed that it was definatly his car but because it had been bought and sold again the "owner" of the car kept it.

07-13-2009, 10:46 AM	#232
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383043 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	I don't know what happened in your case, Lee, but I am absolutely 110% certain that British law, in the normal case, is as I describe it. That's why, when buying a secondhand car, it's so important to do an ID check on it, because should it turn out to be stolen, you will, in the normal course of events, lose your money.

07-14-2009, 07:44 PM	#237
wodin Illiterate Posts: 10,279 Karma: 37848716 Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: The Sandwich Isles Device: Samsung Galaxy S10+, Microsoft Surface Pro	Have we beat da buggah to death yet?

07-14-2009, 10:47 PM	#240
griffonwing Suave Swabby, Savvy? Posts: 1,602 Karma: 520350 Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Harrison, ARrrr, USA - southern Ozark mountains Device: Slate Blue PEZ (Astak Pocket Pro), CVSCX-9300 Quad-band watch phone	Mom always liked you best? I wondered why you had bacon, eggs, toast and OJ for breakfast and all i got was water and oatmeal.

Advert

Advert