Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Not really. It all depends on how the contract is written. Amazon's legal mistake in the Orwell books was not in the remote deleting, but in violating their own terms of service, and false advertising. Had they been up front about the ability, and included a provision for doing so in their terms of service, there would have been no legal issue. (The PR issue is another matter entirely.)
|
I was not talking about Orwell, but the Amazon TOS in general. The discussion seems to have drifted in that direction (I agree that there was no legal issue in the 1984 case, but a major PR disaster). The TOS have never been confirmed by the courts in a legal case. They may well include items that are not legally binding, even if you agree to abide by them. You cannot, for example, agree to sell your children into slavery.
Same with DRM, it has never been tested if removing them for making a backup copy or reading the book on a competing reader is legal or not.