Amazon has banned my account - my Kindle is now a (partial) brick.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by sirbruce

Just to clarify, this isn't true. The only ebooks they can't use are those they bought and then deleted, because they can't redownload them. This I do think is wrong, and is a reason why Amazon needs to keep it's Kindle service seperate from the "banning accounts" implementation. But they aren't deleting books off people's Kindles.

For that matter they should really make it so any purchased media (Kindle, Unbox, MP3) can still be accessed even if they're banning them from buying anymore, but yes they should be able to ban them from the main store, but keep the Kindle library a separate issue.

[drew00149]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

For that matter they should really make it so any purchased media (Kindle, Unbox, MP3) can still be accessed even if they're banning them from buying anymore, but yes they should be able to ban them from the main store, but keep the Kindle library a separate issue.

You actually cant even re download MP3s as far as I can tell.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by drew00149

You actually cant even re download MP3s as far as I can tell.

Oh, didn't know that. I guess I just figured you could.

[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by grisjuan

The phrase "loyal customer" is in common use. I don't think you will succeed in getting the world to change their terminology. In a google fight between "loyal customer" and "regular customer", loyal wins by a wide margin (672K hits to 90K).

Did you read through 627k to see how the phrases were used? Impressive.

[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by igorsk

JFYI, Abebooks is now owned by Amazon.

That doesn't matter. I'm not against shopping at Amazon. My point is that I'm not loyal to them. I could be a regular customer. I also may not be.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by sirbruce

Just to clarify, this isn't true. The only ebooks they can't use are those they bought and then deleted, because they can't redownload them. This I do think is wrong, and is a reason why Amazon needs to keep it's Kindle service seperate from the "banning accounts" implementation. But they aren't deleting books off people's Kindles.

Well, they aren't actively but what is if you have bought so much ebooks that they don't fit all in the kindle? What is if the device get defective? Then all your book investment ist gone ... I can't imagine that this behavior would stand up in court.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by emellaich

On the other hand, remember that Sony used to have a music store and then they closed it down. If you bought copy-protected music from their store, and you have since bought a new music player, you are now out of luck. Unless of course, you remove the DRM yourself.

At least it's easy to get rid of the mp3 DRM, since it only requires, at most, playing the music through to another file. I'm totally ignorant about removing DRM from ebooks, but it's not quite that easy, is it?

As I said earlier, Ian's story is simply an illustration of why DRM is anti-consumer. It doesn't matter who you buy your reader from. If the content is locked you face potential headaches down the road. And you are at the whim of whatever changes are made by your content provider.

I'm beginning to switch my mindset to the idea that I'm not "buying" ebooks when I "purchase" them. Rather, I'm "renting" them, not unlike borrowing from a library, but for a price.

Thing is, when I think about renting ebooks rather than buying them, I begin to think that the prices are too high for a whole lot of them. So the publishers obviously aren't thinking that they are renting the books out to us readers.

But what if some publisher started renting books out on the basis of how long the reader wanted to keep the book? Say that you could "rent" a book for three weeks for three bucks, or two months for six bucks, after which the book evaporated off your reader. Would you do that?

I have to say that personally, I don't care much about keeping my ebooks after I've read them. I know that there are people who find pleasure in rereading books, but I'm always thinking that there's another book that needs its first read. I have reread some books, though, and I believe that I would prefer to have those books in treebook form anyway. So I'd probably rent all my books in ebook format if I could, then purchase the treebook for my keepers.

Heck, I can imagine that at some point, it should be possible to buy the treebook directly from the ebook file:

"Did you enjoy this ebook? Would you like to have a permanent edition of it, to keep on your shelf and read it again with all the pleasure that a well made book brings to your reading, or as a gift? Click here, and <insert book purveyor> will ship the permanent edition to your doorstep. We'll even credit your purchase with the amount you paid to rent this ebook!"

In that context, the problem with DRM for me is just that all books aren't available in a DRMed format my 505 can read.

[sirbruce]

Originally Posted by joblack

Well, they aren't actively but what is if you have bought so much ebooks that they don't fit all in the kindle? What is if the device get defective? Then all your book investment ist gone ... I can't imagine that this behavior would stand up in court.

I agree, but who is going to litigate it? We need a harmed customer who has had this happen to them, and then willingness from someone like the EFF to litigate for free. The same applies to ebook DRM issues, text-to-speech issues, etc.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by Harmon

I have to say that personally, I don't care much about keeping my ebooks after I've read them. I know that there are people who find pleasure in rereading books, but I'm always thinking that there's another book that needs its first read. I have reread some books, though, and I believe that I would prefer to have those books in treebook form anyway. So I'd probably rent all my books in ebook format if I could, then purchase the treebook for my keepers.

I'm following up on my own post, and moving off topic, so it might be doubly unkosher, but in rereading my post, I realized that there's an element of having a trophy in keeping a physical copy of a book, at least for me.

I must have a thousand books around the house, and there's no way I'll reread many of them. These are just a fragment of the lifetime library of books I have owned, but there are at least a couple of hundred that I could never bring myself to let go. I can't imagine feeling that way about an ebook collection.

[Gaurnim]

Originally Posted by Faenad

I think most people here agree that Amazon is right to deny access to customer abusing their return system.

The problem is in the way they are doing it :

- No communication on the banning rules. So long as Amazon's customers remains uninformed, the rules indeed appears as being "capricious".
- No warning
- Denied access to previous digital purchases, and for Kindle owner to the main source of future no-public domain ebook purchases. (Especially since on the other hand they are making an extra effort to deny access to other stores).
- Also, the possibility of getting banned as a "related account". For example if an "abusing customer" added your own address to his own account to send you a gift. Again this may be not true, but since we are left in the dark about the rules we must guess the worst.

It should be rather easy for them to improve the way they ban abusing customers.
Not doing so show that they don't care about any individual customer, just about the big profitability picture.

This is well said, and I think it summarizes pretty well the current beef with Amazon.

I'm perfectly aware that my post is mostly a "me too" post, but I haven't seen a lot of reactions to Faenad's very valid post, so I wanted to increase awareness on it.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by Harmon

At least it's easy to get rid of the mp3 DRM, since it only requires, at most, playing the music through to another file. I'm totally ignorant about removing DRM from ebooks, but it's not quite that easy, is it?



I'm beginning to switch my mindset to the idea that I'm not "buying" ebooks when I "purchase" them. Rather, I'm "renting" them, not unlike borrowing from a library, but for a price.

Thing is, when I think about renting ebooks rather than buying them, I begin to think that the prices are too high for a whole lot of them. So the publishers obviously aren't thinking that they are renting the books out to us readers.

But what if some publisher started renting books out on the basis of how long the reader wanted to keep the book? Say that you could "rent" a book for three weeks for three bucks, or two months for six bucks, after which the book evaporated off your reader. Would you do that?

I have to say that personally, I don't care much about keeping my ebooks after I've read them. I know that there are people who find pleasure in rereading books, but I'm always thinking that there's another book that needs its first read.

It depends on the (e-)book. If you have some story you probably won't read it again but if it is a dictionary/encyclopedia or computer science book you will read it again or check something.

I know from some downloadable audiobook sellers which restrict their use of their audiobooks for 30 years. Well, you could say I'm not interested in using it longer but you could have kids and grandchildren and they could be interested in getting/heritage your stuff.

Think about, you would have a world wide protest if your paperback books would burn off after 10 years or your car would explode after 5 years ... everything which is normal in the offline world shouldn't work in the digital work anymore.

Personally I only buy ebooks that I can 'deciper' and use with my Iliad. I don't trust shops with uncracked drm because they could act like Amazon.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by joblack

Think about, you would have a world wide protest if your paperback books would burn off after 10 years

Realistically, how many of your paperback books do you keep for >10 years? I know that with me, I either lose them, or throw them out, or they just fall to pieces if I read them a lot. It's an analogy I've used before, but I'll say it again: a typical eBook costs roughly the same as a takeaway pizza and I regard it like one - I buy the book to enjoy "now"; I don't regard it as a "lifetime investment" any more than I do the pizza. Am I upset that I can only eat the pizza once? No, I'm not.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Realistically, how many of your paperback books do you keep for >10 years?

Loads (well 100s at least).

[sirbruce]

My brother has just about every paperback he's bought since the 1970s. I would have more than I do now but I lost quite a few in a couple of moves.

[astra]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Realistically, how many of your paperback books do you keep for >10 years?

Back in xUSSR, we used to have around 4.000 books in my house. My father collected them all his life. My friends used to borrow book from us, not from library.
When we moved to Israel, obviously we could not take all books with us, so most of my father's art books and albums were left behind, but we still brought roughly 700+ books and my father is very proud of his collection.

I, in my house in the UK, have 2 bookshelves. They have glass doors to keep books in as good condition as possible (away from dust, dampness etc.). For my books not to fall apart in 10 years time, I buy hardback editions. Slowly, I fill in the book shelves with books I love.
All books in the xUSSR where hardback editions, they didn't print paper backs, so they are still in a very good conditions, some are older than me.

Loose a book? I believe it is a crime.