Quote:
Originally Posted by purl4peace
However, how the company reacts when they have discovered the problem is the issue.
I think the "eBay" model is appropriate -- if they discover an issue while the auction is still up, it is reasonable to remove the auction. However, if the auction had already been completed and the transaction settled, (I may be mistaken here...) eBay basically shrugs its shoulders and says "nothing we can do now..."
Amazon, on the other hand, rather than accept the responsibility for their own mistakes, intrudes into the customer's device to try to mitigate their own liability. It may be true that Amazon would have been exposed from a liability standpoint but they accept that risk when they open up their website for any numnut to sell anything they want to without adequate safeguards. It isn't up to the customer to save Amazon from themselves.
|
I respectfully disagree. I think that Amazon did entirely the correct thing in doing everything in their ability to remove the infringing material from customer devices, and refunding customers' money. Doing that is the very ideal of "accepting responsibility for their own mistakes", although it's difficult to see what "mistake" Amazon made. If someone uploaded these books and deliberately lied about their right to do so, the blame falls squarely on that dishonest person, not on Amazon, it seems to me.