Amazon censorship

[catsittingstill]

Originally Posted by Catlady

There are a bunch of assumptions there. There is not a statement from Amazon on why it has done what it has done.

This is part of what people are complaining about, yes.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by catsittingstill

I am using my freedom of speech to say so here. In part to persuade others who hold different views to see things my way--or at least to see other aspects of the issue that may lead them to moderate their views.

Yeah, I know. I'm here participating in the same discussion for much the same reasons.

[catsittingstill]

Arg. None of my original stuff is coming through. I will do my best to add it here...

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

(Originally Posted by catsittingstill View Post
Sure there are. Alternative 0) Don't be intimidated by a bunch of prudish busybodies into pulling objectionable material. )

There is actually a lot of offensive and/or erotic content on Amazon, and I see no indications that they're going to wipe it all overnight.

Thus proving this is one viable alternative they have used many times in the past and could use this time.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

(Catsittingstill: Amazon has pulled books from the store for various reasons (mostly legal, I thought) in the past--didn't they handle it this way then?)

No. They wiped it from their databases, deleted it from the reading devices, and issued an automatic refund. People subsequently went through the roof.

I was referring to books Amazon discovered, after the 1984 kerfluffle, it couldn't legally sell because the person who put it up was not entitled to do so. Sorry about the misunderstanding. I thought the standard practice was to pull them from the store but not from the Kindles / archives of people who had purchased them already.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

(Catsittingstill: Alternative 2) Pull the book from the archives also and refund the customers for the book whether they delete it from their Kindles or not.)

...except they still bought it, and can read it indefinitely. They just have to back it up themselves. Hence, IMO "minor issue."

They can read it indefinitely provided they had it on their Kindles when Amazon deleted it from their archives, and provided they did not delete it subsequently, believing it was safe on their archives, before they discovered what happened.

Which makes it a minor issue for some but maybe not for others.

And waltzing in to break a previously established agreement, without re-negotiating or even letting the other party know you are breaking it, is the sort of action that calls for an effort to make things right. I'm not saying Amazon should sacrifice their firstborn (nor would their customers wish it) but something on the order of the sort of recompense they made for 1984 would not be unreasonable.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

(Catsittingstill: The author shouldn't have to guess.)

The author knows what she wrote. I think she's got a pretty good idea of what's going on.

She knows what she wrote, of course. What she doesn't know is what, in that 100,000 words, Amazon objects to. Like I said, she shouldn't have to guess.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by RW2112

I just went to Amazon and confirmed they do have "incest fantasy" results of at least 397 items there.

Now that you have shown an interest in such books Amazon will start sending you emails advertising them

[catsittingstill]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Any statement that is sufficiently flexible to cover the massive varieties of work, and the minor variations therein, is going to inherently have enough ambiguity to make the resulting applications seem vague and/or inconsistent.

You have grasped the heart of the argument.

One can't censor evenhandedly; censoring arbitrarily is unfair; perhaps one shouldn't censor at all.

[ApK]

Is it possible that this actually has nothing to do with the incest topic or the content at all and the author just assumed that from the other titles?

Maybe Amazon will eventually give a statement and it'll turn out that...I don't know...all the books had a copyright complaint against them or something?

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by catsittingstill

Except, isn't the _Kama Sutra_ a manual for sex as a method of worship? So wouldn't that make it a holy book in spite of the arousing nature of the material?

As far as I know, the Kama Sutra does not advocate transgressive sexual activities -- just heterosexual positions.

Regardless, all you need to say is "this book is about more than getting hard/wet, therefore it's not prurient" and you've got an argument on your hands. Along those lines, any TOS is unlikely to sufficiently handle the inherent complications.

Originally Posted by catsittingstill

The bible has an enormous amount of material in it that can reasonably be read as Deity expressing approval of all sorts of things we don't want people doing now....

That's nice, but completely irrelevant.

As I said previously, even leaving aside all issues of judgment: The claim that "incest is described in the Bible, therefore my work of incest erotica ought to be treated the same" is patently absurd. It's trivial, childish, unpersuasive and tone-deaf.

Originally Posted by catsittingstill

one standard for every book is still a fair way to do things. If the bible can't meet the standard, perhaps there's something wrong with the standard.

There is no such "one standard" that will work.

The process of passing these types of judgments will always be nuanced, subjective and in flux. There's no getting around it.

Nor is there any guarantee that it will be applied with universal efficiency. If you get popped for driving 75mph in a 55mph zone, no judge is going to void your speeding ticket because you insist there was another driver that was going 80. You were still speeding, therefore you still get a ticket.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Any statement that is sufficiently flexible to cover the massive varieties of work, and the minor variations therein, is going to inherently have enough ambiguity to make the resulting applications seem vague and/or inconsistent.

The British Board of Film Censors have a list of things that film makers are not allowed to put in their films. I don't see how it would be impossible to have a similar list for books sold on Amazon.

What is probably the most worrying about this is it is very unlikely that anyone at Amazon is actually reading any of these books before deciding whether people should be allowed to read them or not. In the UK we still have fairly draconian laws over "obscene publications", but even here they can be allowed if they can be shown to have artistic merit.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Are you genuinely incapable of distinguishing between a religious text and prurient material?

It's tough to see the difference between religion and erotica once one delves into the rituals and history of many religious functions. Besides, to make the distinction requires that one believe religion doesn't equal fiction, a question that remains up in the air.

Remember that what one person considers a religion another considers a ponzi scheme.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Prurient material is written to get the reader(s) sexually aroused. The Old Testament, to put it mildly, was not.

The Old Testament wasn't written to arouse sexual desire but it was written to justify genocide, murder, and many other things that we consider morally repugnant, including human sacrifice.

[catsittingstill]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

As far as I know, the Kama Sutra does not advocate transgressive sexual activities -- just heterosexual positions.

Regardless, all you need to say is "this book is about more than getting hard/wet, therefore it's not prurient"

So am I understanding correctly that it is your argument that a) any book that is about something more than simple arousal is not prurient

therefore b) the _Kama Sutra_ is not prurient (an interesting err...position, but okay)

and c) therefore if the book in question (which I have not read, or I would be able to judge this for myself) is about something more than simple arousal (for example contains other storylines woven in?) it is also not prurient?

And do you agree that d) if the book in question is not prurient by this measure it shouldn't be pulled?

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

(Catsittingstill pointing out that the bible is full of material that appears to advocate bad behavior
)
That's nice, but completely irrelevant.

As I said previously, even leaving aside all issues of judgment: The claim that "incest is described in the Bible, therefore my work of incest erotica ought to be treated the same" is patently absurd. It's trivial, childish, unpersuasive and tone-deaf.

Well, actually, I don't agree that it's nice that the bible is full of material that appears to advocate bad behavior. Nor do I agree that it is irrelevant, since people upthread have claimed that this book deserves to be pulled because it might be seen as advocating bad behavior.

And I do not agree that there is anything absurd about the simple observation that applying different standards to different books is unfair.

"Treat this work of incest erotica like the bible" does sound ridiculous, which is why I don't advocate that. "Treat all books the same with regard to standards that determine whether you sell or pull them, and with regard to handling customer complaints regarding them" is noticeably less ridiculous.

And is all I want.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

There is no such "one standard" that will work.

The process of passing these types of judgments will always be nuanced, subjective and in flux. There's no getting around it.

Nor is there any guarantee that it will be applied with universal efficiency. If you get popped for driving 75mph in a 55mph zone, no judge is going to void your speeding ticket because you insist there was another driver that was going 80. You were still speeding, therefore you still get a ticket.

You have indeed grasped the heart of the problem, as I observed elsewhere.

And unlike speeding, where, though fair enforcement would be better, even spotty enforcement reduces dangerous behavior that often ends up hurting innocent people, writing erotica hurts no one.

At which point the unfairness of any possible standard does loom larger to me.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

As far as I know, the Kama Sutra does not advocate transgressive sexual activities -- just heterosexual positions.

Do you mean, "the Kama Sutra doesn't advocate any sexual activities that are currently illegal in the US?" Because some of what's in there has been illegal in the past.

Nor is there any guarantee that it will be applied with universal efficiency. If you get popped for driving 75mph in a 55mph zone, no judge is going to void your speeding ticket because you insist there was another driver that was going 80. You were still speeding, therefore you still get a ticket.

If you get popped for "speeding" in a zone where the rule is "drive safely," it's very reasonable to complain if there are no standards listed for "safe driving." Pointing out that someone else was swerving all over the road is definitely relevant, and may indicate discrimination against your type of car rather than an intention to provide a safe neighborhood.

Claiming or implying that "all decent people will agree on what content should be acceptable" is beyond ridiculous.

[Kali Yuga]

OK folks, let's get a tiny bit back on track here.

The author who got booted quite literally says: "The Bible has incest in it. So Amazon, if that's why you dropped my book, then you should stop selling the Bible as well."

This claim is, as I said before: absurd, childish, trivial, fatuous, specious and so forth. This specific argument has absolutely no merit.

You are all welcome to be heathens if you want, that's none of my business. But the various opinions of the Old Testament itself are simply not relevant to this particular claim, and do not bolster it in the slightest.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Do you mean, "the Kama Sutra doesn't advocate any sexual activities that are currently illegal in the US?" Because some of what's in there has been illegal in the past.

...and shifting public morals is one reason why even a highly specific set of standards doesn't really work.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

If you get popped for "speeding" in a zone where the rule is "drive safely," it's very reasonable to complain if there are no standards listed for "safe driving...."

You're mixing up the metaphor here, and in doing so miss the point.

CSS is saying "a less-than-universal application of a rule is unfair." I'm simply pointing out that this is merely a reality and a common occurrence -- and still doesn't let you off the hook.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Pointing out that someone else was swerving all over the road is definitely relevant....

Sure, if their behavior forced you to violate the law.

That doesn't even remotely describe the situation here. And why in this particular instance, extending the metaphor isn't helpful or relevant.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Claiming or implying that "all decent people will agree on what content should be acceptable" is beyond ridiculous.

Tell that to the Supreme Court.

Better yet, please feel free to propose a standard that would actually work. Then demonstrate that The Lover will universally land on one side or the other of said test.

My position is, you won't and you can't. Any standard with enough flexibility to cover all the books that are commercially available, and are waiting in the wings, will wind up looking "arbitrary" and/or "unfair" and/or "unacceptably subjective" to someone, somewhere. (Or, the offended party will proclaim that their book doesn't cross the line, even if others believe it does.) Any book that gets even close to the line is going to require a human judgment call, and that human's judgement may well be different than yours.

[abookreader]

Odd announcement by Amazon today

(AMAZON OFFICIAL)
Due to a technical issue, for a short window of time three books were temporarily unavailable for re-download by customers who had previously purchased them. When this was brought to our attention, we fixed the problem and those books were once again made available for re-download. We apologize for the inconvenience.

I'm not sure exactly how that ties in. Selena Kitt says she was only officially notified of one book being pulled. Perhaps this means the other books that were made unavailable, but she never received any notification over -- are being put back.

Confusing, but at least a step in the right direction. I guess.