Limited Kindle Unlimited

[barryem]

I just did some reading on Amazon and they say they have over 1 million books in Kindle Unlimited. They said there were thousands of books in Prime lending and they say the KOLL books can be identified because they have a Prime reading badge. I'm a bit confused about the different plans. I had thought that Prime lending and KOLL were the same thing and Amazon does seem to indicate that but not clearly and other sites and mentions in this forum seem to indicate that they're different.

I also just tried converting a Kindle Unlimited book to an epub with Calibre and Apprentice Alf. It worked just fine. I thought that might be a fluke so I tried another one, which also worked. It does seem they can be converted just like any other book.

I would recommend doing this on any kind of regular basis. I suspect that Amazon will know since in effect I "read' the entire book in a few seconds. I'm assuming here that Calibre uses Kindle for PC as part of it's conversion process. If it doesn't will someone let me know?

I did delete the books after testing them so please don't ban me.

Wait. There shouldn't have been a smiley. I've been banned for such things in the past.

Barry

[Deskisamess]

I'm assuming here that Calibre uses Kindle for PC as part of it's conversion process.

I don't know about the conversion, but the storage location for K4PC is where I would get the book files to take into Calibre.

Have not done it in a while though, been reading KU books quickly and have no need to format shift them.

[GeoffR]

Originally Posted by Mistyfarm

I received an email from "M" at Amazon.com.au telling me;
"I have checked the details and I see that you have reached maximum number of books you can borrow per month. You will be able to borrow books in a few days once the borrow books goes below the limit in last 30 days.

It seems like a clear breach of advertising standards to describe a service as unlimited when there are actually undisclosed limits. You could look at making a complaint to the advertising standards authority or whatever the equivalent organisation is in your country.

One possible issue with making a complaint in this case could be that the only evidence of the breach is what Amazon have admitted in a private email, and so only someone who had received the email could take the complaint, which leaves them open to retaliation, e.g. Amazon could cancel their subscription, or maybe close their account.

[DrNefario]

Originally Posted by barryem

I just did some reading on Amazon ... they say the KOLL books can be identified because they have a Prime reading badge.

It used to be the case before Prime Reading that the Prime badge meant it was in the KOLL, but now it's used for Prime Reading. I tend to assume that things with the KU badge are likely to be in the KOLL, but there isn't actually a good way of finding KOLL books specifically any more.

[DrNefario]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Thanks. I was looking in the "Books" section of the Fire tablet, where it wasn't, instead of in the Kindle app, where it was. I'd much rather search with a Web browser, but the KOLL option is only shown in the tablet. Ridiculous.

I don't think my wishlist system even works on the Fire, because the wishlists are accessed in such a way (via the browser?) that the KOLL borrow option doesn't appear. I gave up trying on the tablet, and just use my Paperwhite to do the borrowing (although the book will then be available for the Fire).

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by GeoffR

It seems like a clear breach of advertising standards to describe a service as unlimited when there are actually undisclosed limits. You could look at making a complaint to the advertising standards authority or whatever the equivalent organisation is in your country.

If I go to a place that offers "all you can eat", get a plate, eat it all and go back for more, I expect them to give me more food.
If I get a plate, throw the food in the bin and go back for more, I expect them to ask me to leave.

From the KU terms and conditions: (my emphasis)

As a member of Kindle Unlimited, you may read Kindle books and listen to Audible audiobooks from a designated list of titles an unlimited number of times for so long as you are a member of the program

It doesn't say you can check out an unlimited number of books, flick to the end then return them, faster than anyone could actually read. That is throwing the food in the bin, not eating it.

We still haven't had an answer as to how many books the original poster had checked out before hitting the limit. If is a hundred, then yes they have a real complaint, because someone could genuinely read that many books in a month. If it was 5000, would you still be complaining about Amazon's reaction?

And:

We may take reasonable actions necessary to prevent fraud, including placing restrictions on the number of titles that can be accessed from the program at any one time.

[DrNefario]

My understanding is that the OP was checking them out, searching them, then returning them if they didn't match. I can see that this would look like fraud to some extent, but it still seems like there should have been a warning first, especially if the account has previously been operated in good faith.

I guess the issue with amazon is that it relies on minimal human involvement, and its easy to get caught up by the mysterious algorithm in some kafkaesque way.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by Mistyfarm

ShortNet ..... Love the name.

But You have to know for your own protection against any possible legal remedy from Amazon that by deliberately showing your child your device with the content visible, you may have contravened the Amazon's Conditions of Use & Sale paragraph 6. RIGHTS OF ACCESS AND USE & more importantly let's not forget Section 23 subsection 1 "M'Lord" !!

You may wish to consider whether you need to buy from Amazon a KU subscription for each and every one of your children and maybe even a spare "guest account" in case you want to show someone else a quote from any other Amazon content !!

Just putting it out there! See;
Conditions of Use & Sale
Last updated on 5 December 2017.
https://www.amazon.com.au/gp/help/cu...deId=201374360

If you are serious you are really getting carried away here. It is simply incorrect to interpret these words so as to prevent your child reading on your Kindle

Originally Posted by Mistyfarm

Thanks for that. I wondered why some of the books were there. So they still get paid eh?

But isn't that Amazon's problem to police?

Again I'm a "verified" paid up member not a scammer of ANY flavour!

Do me the courtesy of telling me the rules before you BLOCK me.


(incidentally I did actually manage to look at another 9 KU books before before the spotty work experience kids at Amazon locked me out again)

We may not yet have any indication from Amazon about what the limit actually is. But we do know that the number of books you borrowed from KU exceeds that limit. Can you please share with us exactly how many books you had borrowed from KU in the month before you were banned. This will at least give some idea.

The measure you have been caught by is an anti-fraud measure and a good and necessary one. It is understandable that Amazon does not want to release the exact number of books involved, as it may assist scammers by allowing them to split their activities into segments just below this number. Amazon is in a continual battle with scammers. It pays authors in KU by pages read. So the author of a scam book in KU makes nothing unless someone clicks through the pages of the book. One technique used by KU scammers is so-called click farms, where low paid workers click through their books to generate page reads. I accept that you are not participating in any type of fraud, though I'm still not clear on exactly what you are doing. I don't like the fact that you haven't shared the number of books involved, but assume you are about to do so. Regardless, it appears that, from Amazon's point of view, the way you are using KU is both unusual and indistinguishable from some of the techniques used by scammers. It is unrealistic to expect that Amazon will phone you in these circumstances. Everyone is well aware of their degree of automation. Where Amazon does fall down, especially with Authors, is in communicating after the action has been taken and, if necessary, remedying that action.

You will soon get kicked out of a smorgasbord if you are taking huge plates of food, taking a bite out of each item before discarding your plate and then going back for more. I must admit that so far you have not attracted my sympathy nor am I willing to condemn Amazon. I will be very interested in any full explanation of exactly what you were doing and why and details of the numbers of books involved. After all, KU lends books for the purpose of reading them.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Mistyfarm

(incidentally I did actually manage to look at another 9 KU books before before the spotty work experience kids at Amazon locked me out again)

This was probably foolhardy. How quickly did you race through those additional books? You just confirmed the accuracy of the original block.

It will be even harder to get a real person to listen to you now.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by GeoffR

It seems like a clear breach of advertising standards to describe a service as unlimited when there are actually undisclosed limits. You could look at making a complaint to the advertising standards authority or whatever the equivalent organisation is in your country.

Mr. Simpson, this is the most blatant case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film "The NeverEnding Story".

-Lionel Hutz, The Simpsons

[barryem]

It's pretty common to use the term "unlimited" to refer to a situation where there are few enough limits that most people won't encounter them. Unlimited data on phones is a good example. Most really mean they'll slow down your speed to make it pretty much unusable during peak hours after you've used a certain amount of data.

If you try to stop marketers and advertisers from telling lies the economy would come to a screeching halt. Our economy is built on lies. "Westinghouse had a better idea!". "Breakfast of Champions!", "A diamond is forever", "A little dab'll do ya", "Double your pleasure! Double your fun!", "The best a man can get!", "Let your fingers do the walking!" and my personal favorite "Put a tiger in your tank".

Barry

[Mistyfarm]

Sorry kids …. things be crazy here, so I’m a bit tardy.

OK to be perfectly honest, I have been a wee bit tongue in cheek here, slightly at Amazon's expense. Here in Aus we like a bit of ragging and gigging.

And ShortNet, don’t worry – they won’t really come after you and please keep enriching your childrens’ minds with great books on your device.

To be absolutely fair to Amazon, I freely admit they were quite right to _look_ at my useage, it was definitely more than anyone could realistically have actually fully read every word, so I don't blame them for that.

What narked me was they summarily blocked my KU without any notice or followup to see if my account had been hacked. But without any problem promptly processing and debiting my purchases. So my account wasn’t suspended, I’d just been specifically locked out of KU with active support tickets still unresolved.

And they knew I was a legit customer and had been for over a decade. So they always knew who I was and where to find me if I really was dodgy.

Nup, nothing from them except a "Sorry.....Internal Error" message when I wanted to borrow a book. No followup whatsoever. If they ever bring out a credit card, I wouldn't trust taking out an account with them!

Now some replies.

Originally Posted by murraypaul

So whatever limit is set seems to be high enough not to catch anyone actually reading the books they select, so calling it a swindle seems a little silly.

Oh bother! Did my go at writing in a Sherlock Holmesesque British accent not sound very convincing? Doh! It was an attempt at satire using Cockney Rhyming slang, you’re clearly not a fan.

Originally Posted by murraypaul

If I go to a place that offers "all you can eat", get a plate, eat it all and go back for more, I expect them to give me more food.
If I get a plate, throw the food in the bin and go back for more, I expect them to ask me to leave.

Some of these books weren't just "undercooked" they were raw, the bread rolls were hollow and the beef chilli came out of a Dog Food tin.

I'd happily go back and list some of those titles to let you know which - but they'll just keep blocking me if I do that again.

And a Library tore up a borrower’s library card for just browsing the shelves…….never.

Further quote
It doesn't say you can check out an unlimited number of books, flick to the end then return them, faster than anyone could actually read. That is throwing the food in the bin, not eating it.

Only 10 at a time, flicked thru looking for keywords/themes then returned before the next 10 searched, in full compliance with stated rules (with no actual binning occurring - just “returning back to shelf” - all marked as “Returned”) So you reckon once I put the dog chow on my plate I gotsta eat it all?

Actual number of books is not stated on my KU borrow page. Just a date sorted list of books marked returned and I need to scroll all the way down and manually count ……. happy to simply admit to x00 during the period of my researching.

Again I freely admit to “flaggable” numbers.

Further quote
We may take reasonable actions necessary to prevent fraud, including placing restrictions on the number of titles that can be accessed from the program at any one time.

BINGO!! The fraud clause. In my view, taking action under the fraud clause is a clear “allegation” of fraud. There is no other relevant clause in my case that allows “action”. The only stated limit that resembles "at any one time" is the previously unstated 10 borrowed books limit on the KU borrow page.

That’s why I’m pussed (my NZ accent here)

[Mistyfarm]

Originally Posted by GeoffR

It seems like a clear breach of advertising standards to describe a service as unlimited when there are actually undisclosed limits. You could look at making a complaint to the advertising standards authority or whatever the equivalent organisation is in your country.

Probably no point, our ACCC is toothless even when it has a will to get off the couch.

[Mistyfarm]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

My understanding is that the OP was checking them out, searching them, then returning them if they didn't match. I can see that this would look like fraud to some extent, but it still seems like there should have been a warning first, especially if the account has previously been operated in good faith.

Woohoo! Spot on Doc!

I'm in a researching phase of an educational piece so I'm hardly going to FULLY read irrelevant stuff. Some titles were noted for another look later on - again within the stated rules for "Unlimited" access.

Cheers.

[Mistyfarm]

Originally Posted by darryl

If you are serious you are really getting carried away here. It is simply incorrect to interpret these words so as to prevent your child reading on your Kindle

I wish you’re right Dazz,

Hopefully I've reassured ShortNet, it would be a bad PR move but _technically_ it’s unequivocally stated by Amazon….
6. RIGHTS OF ACCESS AND USE "......... The right granted to you does not include any license or permission to use the Amazon Service or any part thereof for the benefit of any third party,....."

“The measure you have been caught by is an anti-fraud measure and a good and necessary one.”.

Ouch!! “Et tu Brute?”

Shall we bring back Guantanamo Bay and lets put Hicksy back in also while we’re at it?

As for Amazon's revenue model I'd be happy to see it, good luck getting it out of them; so where non shills are getting their info from I don’t know (I actually suspect that the most money they earn is from datamining YOU) See that old quote 'If You're Not Paying, You're The Product'
*
But lets just say that they pay authors per page view as has been suggested and that they really were actually dumb enough NOT to have algorized it to filter out spurious use; how would you calculate someone was just blitzing or scamming so Amazon could keep making the most money without losing it to real life fraudsters?
*
Let’s help these geniuses out a bit here. I would say by all means trickle down to the authors that write decent stuff that people “actually” read and kept for a while, to reward and encourage them to write more. And those that weren’t read by more than x pages or kept for more than x got nothing – because their “work” wasn’t of any marketable value. Anybody else chime in here with any more suggestions, clearly the poindexters seem to be struggling on their own.
*
After all, how many scammers have >10 year cred, live in OZ! - with $x00.00 in purchases ????

Thanks for your “scammer” profiling info btw. But remind me not to pull out a comb out of my pocket lest I get shot by a US cop!

These peanuts know exactly who I am and where I live and have already connected this account with theirs, I have no doubt.

“Where Amazon does fall down, especially with Authors, is in communicating after the action has been taken and, if necessary, remedying that action.”

So you’re an author and you can say that with absolute authority?

Well as a “Reader” …… I can.

“After all, KU lends books for the purpose of reading them.” Sigh, In my very humble opinion …. No they don’t! They do it to make money………. From the subscriptions, the ads, the datamining ………. please don’t make me look thu the Ts & Cs again, my eyes are bleeding already!