Amazon removed books from my Kindle

[haertig]

Originally Posted by John F

So let's assume we use your:

So let's assume the customer paid $2.99 in the 1984 case. Amazon kept $0.897 + $0.30 and put $1.793 in the seller's account.

Amazon honors the takedown notice. They return the money to customer. So $2.99 - $2.99 = 0. So technically, Amazon received there "cut", but the cut was 0. They may have received a bigger cut if the seller sold other ebooks.

DNSB, it may time to reconsider that CFO dream.

Amazon, as the seller of the book, definitely took their cut and banked it. But they were later forced to give it back due to the fact that they had sold an illegitimate book. "Forced" could have been an internal management directive, or an external legal process - I am not privy to the details. But having to give back their cut does not mean that Amazon was not the seller, or that they did not take a cut in the first place. It just means that Amazon screwed up as seller and had to pay for their mistake.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by rkomar

You and I seem to very different in this respect. When I reread a book many years later, it is a different experience because I am different than I was when I read the book last time. Usually the difference is small, but occasionally it feels like I'm reading a different story. My memory is not great, so maybe that accounts for it. Anyway, re-reading offers me a window into my own personal changes over time, so I get something new I value from that.

No doubt there are many people like you. That's why I was pointing out the differences. The arrival of ebooks didn't really change my reading habits (other than being able to start reading books I wanted to read much quicker). I've never been much of a librarian/archivist. The act of reading is all I care about.

[Stingo]

Originally Posted by haertig

I believe book purchases are paid to Amazon. What Amazon does with the money after that (pay it to the seller?) is not our concern as consumers. And it was Amazon that removed the book from people's Kindles.

There are no "Kindle purchases." "Kindle Content is licensed, not sold, to you by the Content Provider." When you buy a book you are merely paying for a revocable license.

[Sarmat89]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Removing books from users' devices is a very shady policy.

No. Every manufacturer has a right to ensure its platform won't be used for piracy.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by Stingo

There are no "Kindle purchases." "Kindle Content is licensed, not sold, to you by the Content Provider." When you buy a book you are merely paying for a revocable license.

So they say.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Sarmat89

No. Every manufacturer has a right to ensure its platform won't be used for piracy.

Their store, yes. Users' devices, no.

[Stingo]

Originally Posted by Sarmat89

No. Every manufacturer has a right to ensure its platform won't be used for piracy.

Removing DRM for your own archival purposes and loading to your own device is not piracy. Piracy and copyright infringement is the distribution to other after the removal. At least that is what the law was last time I checked a few years ago.

[Sarmat89]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Users' devices, no.

They can manipulate their content on any device everywhere. They do not affect the users' personal data.

[Sarmat89]

Originally Posted by Stingo

Removing DRM for your own archival purposes and loading to your own device is not piracy.

You can't create archive copies of something you don't own. If Amazon sold you a floppy containing a book, you could archive it. Digital downloads are not retail sales and are the property of the rights holder.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Sarmat89

They can manipulate their content on any device everywhere. They do not affect the users' personal data.

No, they can't. What's on my personal device is not their business.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Sarmat89

You can't create archive copies of something you don't own. If Amazon sold you a floppy containing a book, you could archive it. Digital downloads are not retail sales and are the property of the rights holder.

Again, DRM removal and piracy are two different things. And even if there are pirated books on an user's device, it is not any retailer's business to mess with them. There are methods for dealing with lawbreakers and playing police yourself is not one of them.

[DiapDealer]

Doesn't anybody on either side of this perennial tempest ever get tired of the pointless (not to mention repetitive) bickering back and forth over it?

[Hollow Man]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Doesn't anybody on either side of this perennial tempest ever get tired of the pointless (not to mention repetitive) bickering back and forth over it?

It's been going on for so long (it's the same arguments, as I implied somewhere above, that people have been using for software since at least the 80s) that I'm desensitized to it.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by Sarmat89

They can manipulate their content on any device everywhere. They do not affect the users' personal data.

The whole point of recent posts in this thread is that Amazon removed USERS PERSONAL CONTENT that had been side-loaded onto the devices. They did not remove Amazon content - that was allowed to stay - they removed USERS CONTENT.

[slm]

Originally Posted by haertig

The whole point of recent posts in this thread is that Amazon removed USERS PERSONAL CONTENT that had been side-loaded onto the devices. They did not remove Amazon content - that was allowed to stay - they removed USERS CONTENT.

If I have been reading this thread correctly, that is incorrect--they are removing content that the user has marked as Amazon content but Amazon does not show as Amazon content.