Amazon Censorship Expands

[RoboRay]

Originally Posted by jamthecat

BTW, the lawyer I spoke with says I'd have to get a lawyer in Seattle to do any suing, since everything happened there. I have up to a year to decide, and since I'm slated to be in Seattle in October, I may take that long.

Just curious if the lawyer commented on the merits of a case where you're suing a 3rd party because you don't like the terms of the agreement your own publisher made with them...

[jamthecat]

Originally Posted by RoboRay

Just curious if the lawyer commented on the merits of a case where you're suing a 3rd party because you don't like the terms of the agreement your own publisher made with them...

My suit would be against the reporter for KCPQ, who labeled my book as pornography, thus causing Amazon to take it down. He was iffy on the case but felt I'd be better off talking to a lawyer in Seattle about the merits of it. He pointed out the fact is, the book IS still available in other places, like Barnes & Noble, so that hurts my damages claim. As does the fact that two of my other titles are still available through Amazon. If all I wanted was an apology and a correction, I wasn't going to get one...not from Fox News. They're notorious for making up their own facts and not backing down from them. Amazon MIGHT put the book back up if there was enough negative publicity about it, but I have no legal recourse to force them to sell it -- which he told me even though I said I wasn't interested in going that far.

As for the publicity and my ranting and raving on various sites -- Fox's lawyers would rip me apart no what I did, so why worry about it? As I told him, I own all my statements. Apparently, that's considered a plus in this case, so long as I maintain pride of ownership and don't waver or try to minimize or hide anything.

So...we'll see what happens. In the meantime, word is spreading...and I'm helping spread it.

And I have now decided I will NEVER buy an electronic book. I don't want ANYONE to have control over what I read, not in any way, form or fashion.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by jamthecat

And I have now decided I will NEVER buy an electronic book. I don't want ANYONE to have control over what I read, not in any way, form or fashion.

I'm not sure I understand that decision.

Incidentally, I have determined that I can't buy ebooks from Barnes & Noble in Australia.

Do you happen to know if your ebook was georestricted in Amazon? If it wasn't couldn't you argue that you book now only being available the U.S. amounts to damages?

I know you've mentioned Bulldog Books which is some sort of Australian distributor, but this would only be paperback so your ebook market is still crippled. Additionally, I'm not sure I understand how I would get your book through these guys.

If I were you I would still try to find other ways of getting your ebooks to the world through other distribution services so that you can capitalise on the "buzz". If everything is OK with what Amazon is doing because they're a business, there's no need for you NOT to think exactly the same way. This book afterall is your business.

Keep the publicity alive - make the book and ebook as available as you can and hopefully you can capitalise on it. Personally, I hope you make a huge amount of money from this.

Regards
Caleb

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by jamthecat

And I have now decided I will NEVER buy an electronic book. I don't want ANYONE to have control over what I read, not in any way, form or fashion.

I buy plenty of electronic books; nobody has control over what I read. (I no longer buy paper except for books not available in electronic formats, and never for leisure reading. I'll buy paper reference books but not novels.) What I don't buy is DRM'd books that have to be registered through specific software or to specific devices.

Ebooks like the ones here at Mobileread, or Project Gutenberg, or Baen's free library, don't give anyone control over your reading. You can download the book, install it on any device you want, convert it to another format if you care to, send it to a friend when you're done with it. (That last is potentially breaking copyright, depending on the terms of the book; Baen & Gutenberg are fine with sharing them around, and most of the ones here are public domain.)

The big ebookstores that publish the "Big 6" publishers have worked hard to convince people that ebooks are always locked to the store or the device, or that customers should expect someone to be logging their reading habits. It's not true.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

... Ebooks like the ones here at Mobileread, or Project Gutenberg, or Baen's free library, don't give anyone control over your reading ...

BeWrite Books is another source of DRM-free books, but according to their website, "...we do not offer: books for children or exclusively YA, erotica, swords-and-sorcery fantasy and space-opera-style science fiction. All other genres are represented ...". Nevertheless, this might be of interest to others who are interested in buying e-books.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by boxcorner

BeWrite Books is another source of DRM-free books, but according to their website, "...we do not offer: books for children or exclusively YA, erotica, swords-and-sorcery fantasy and space-opera-style science fiction. All other genres are represented ...". Nevertheless, this might be of interest to others who are interested in buying e-books.

I wondered why I couldn't find any swords-and-sorcery fantasy there...that's one of my genres! Most of the books I've seen at bewrite in the fantasy section are not really what I'd consider fantasy. But I'm still shifting through the catalog, so we'll see.

[whitearrow]

Originally Posted by jamthecat

My suit would be against the reporter for KCPQ, who labeled my book as pornography, thus causing Amazon to take it down.

Wow, talk about your uphill battles. Whether something is pornography or not is the classic example of an opinion.

And I have now decided I will NEVER buy an electronic book. I don't want ANYONE to have control over what I read, not in any way, form or fashion.

This is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Besides, how does buying an electronic book give someone control over what you read? It's simply a delivery format, like paper. Every bookstore or library you walk into has already exercised control over what you read by deciding what it will carry and what it won't. How is an ebookseller or lender any different?

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by whitearrow

Wow, talk about your uphill battles. Whether something is pornography or not is the classic example of an opinion.

But whether a word was used as an insult, with the result of damaging a person's reputation and income, is a lot easier to prove. And while the reporter may believe the term "pornography" means "sexually explicit in any way," knowing that people would understand it to mean "entirely comprised of sex with no literary merits aside from that" makes it a deliberate attempt to mislead people.

I think there's grounds for a case, but proving deception, rather than just negative opinion, will be difficult.

Saying "this book is utter tripe and not worth reading" isn't libel; convincing Amazon it should be pulled for violating content guidelines that it doesn't (at least, by comparison with several thousand other books), is libel. But it does look like a hard thing to prove.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

I wondered why I couldn't find any swords-and-sorcery fantasy there...that's one of my genres! Most of the books I've seen at bewrite in the fantasy section are not really what I'd consider fantasy. But I'm still shifting through the catalog, so we'll see.

Talk to neilmarr about it. He's very approachable.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by whitearrow

Wow, talk about your uphill battles. Whether something is pornography or not is the classic example of an opinion.



This is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Besides, how does buying an electronic book give someone control over what you read? It's simply a delivery format, like paper. Every bookstore or library you walk into has already exercised control over what you read by deciding what it will carry and what it won't. How is an ebookseller or lender any different?

Amazon can remove ebooks remotely from people's Kindles. I don't know if other ereaders have the same capability or not.

[Sydney's Mom]

I'm sorry this is affecting your livelihood, but make sure you get someone to do this on a contingency basis.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Amazon can remove ebooks remotely from people's Kindles. I don't know if other ereaders have the same capability or not.

Nook, Kobo and the Sony Daily might be able to, but have shown no signs of exercising that much individual control. And Amazon has promised it won't do this again without a court order or similar external push; it won't just decide "oops, we shouldn't have sold you that" and remove it. (Which promise may not be worth anything, but the previous actions were taken before they made that promise. And since they lost a lawsuit for yanking books from people's Kindles, they're not likely to do so again.)

Any ebook reader that buys books through wifi has the possibility of giving the store access to what they're reading, and to some extent control. (Maybe it could auto-download an updated version of the book? I don't think any of the current readers do this, but it wouldn't be hard to make one that did.)

But ereaders that don't have wireless ability bypass even the possibility of that kind of interference, and there's no shortage of those.

[whitearrow]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

But whether a word was used as an insult, with the result of damaging a person's reputation and income, is a lot easier to prove.

An insult is not defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. Calling someone a total utter and complete moron who isn't competent to make a peanut butter sandwich may well be insulting and damaging to their reputation -- but it isn't defamation. Calling something pornography may be damaging, but whether something is pornography is in the eye of the beholder. Further, you have to defame a person, not their work. But even if the reporter said the author is a pornographer, that's still an opinion. It's not defamatory under the law.

One of the elements of defamation is establishing that the alleged defamatory statement is false. How do you establish that the book isn't pornography? The plaintiff can get 10 experts to testify.... so can the defendant. Reasonable people differ, which is the hallmark of an opinion.

Moreover, even if you could establish a false statement of fact, you'd need to prove causation -- that the reporter's statement directly caused Amazon to remove the book. Good luck getting someone from Amazon to admit that. (The fact that one thing followed another is not causation.) The same problem would exist if the plaintiff decided to pursue a business tort theory instead of defamation.

[Andrew H.]

@Whitearrow

Very good post. But it's even hard to prove than that - because the "defamation" is about jamthecat's book, he is almost certainly a "public figure" (or a "limited purpose public figure,"), meaning that a claim of defamation will only lie if he can prove "actual malice."

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by whitearrow

An insult is not defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. ... Calling something pornography may be damaging, but whether something is pornography is in the eye of the beholder.

If Amazon has a "no pornography" rule for its books, calling something "pornography" is stating that the book violates Amazons terms for content. Proving that was a deliberate attempt to get the book removed, and that the book does not fit Amazon's criteria for "pornography," is a matter that can be supported by evidence.

I think what's likely available is closer to "a hysterical bureaucratic coverup and pass-the-buck fest" than "evidence," and Amazon and Fox both have really big scary lawyers that I wouldn't want to be up against... but maybe this is the case that could bring up the combination problem of unchecked media declarations and business reactions to those declarations.

One of the elements of defamation is establishing that the alleged defamatory statement is false. How do you establish that the book isn't pornography?

Could establish that it is or isn't porn by Amazon's definition. If Amazon "doesn't publish pornography," they need a definition.

Moreover, even if you could establish a false statement of fact, you'd need to prove causation -- that the reporter's statement directly caused Amazon to remove the book. Good luck getting someone from Amazon to admit that. (The fact that one thing followed another is not causation.)

Oh yeah, nightmare evidence chain. But possible, just difficult.