Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwen Morse
You can de-register specific hardware kindles from your account (happens all the time with returns).
As for the assorted "Kindle For" apps, there's an option on the Amazon site to de-register those as well. So, if your PC hard drive dies and you install the app on your new drive, you can remove the old version and keep your totals in check. Much better than expecting you to remove it from the system side (as required by other DRM schemes I've dealt with in the past).
I've had at least 10 (probably more) Kindle "devices" on my account, but never more than 4 at a time. I can still download and open every book I own on my latest PC install (earlier today).
|
Good to know. So there was in effect no issue for those involved in the 2006 Amazon DRM shift. You simply de-register your old device, re-register your new device, and
viola you have access to your library on your new device. I understand now why there was virtually no outcry-except among the digerati- for Amazon's 2006 move. I also understand why it wasn't mentioned earlier-it sort of vitiates the whole "Amazon-made-this-DRM-change-and-I-was-forced-to-strip-DRM-to get access-to-my-library" argument. No you weren't forced-you violated the DRM, because you could violate the DRM and you wanted to.
I find that the anti DRM folks consistently overstate their case that DRM unduly burdens the consumer. They bang on about not being able to " lend or share" their ebooks, leaving unmentioned the fact that by "lending" or "sharing" they mean violating federal copyright law.
They also tend to deprecate the legitimate ways that IP rights holders have provided to ameliorate the problems caused by DRM.
"Can't lend books"
"Can't share books with family members"
"Can't access the books if you move to a new device"
"Can't backup/archive books"
Every one of those statements is at best, a partial untruth but they tend to be repeated, without qualifications, whenever these discussions come up.
I am more convinced than ever, that people who oppose DRM do so from purely ideological motives that have little to do with the practical effects of DRM on the consumer. And that's fine. If you truly believe that DRM, like copyright, is some kind of affront to your "ownership" rights, then argue that. Just don't try to argue that you are doing it in defense of the "average consumer" or because DRM raises insurmountable obstacles to legitimate uses of your ebooks.