Makes me glad my reader is not connected

[Mitchll]

Originally Posted by akira28

Legally? Perhaps not. Morally? Positively, absolutely.

Problems?
1. An author changed his mind about the ebook format so Amazon removes the books from your possession without your consent while you were reading it. You don't see a problem?
2. Furthermore, Amazon can close accounts, delete your content and prevent further downloads making the Kindle useless. Will they refund your Kindle purchase too?

For all practical purposes, the books on Amazon were stolen property and purchasers from Amazon under the law received no valid title to them. It would be no different if they were pbooks except that the cost of retrieval would have prevented the effort. No harm, no foul.

[JSWolf]

The article is not about a publisher pulling out and that publisher's eBooks then being removed from Kindles. It about the illegal George Orwell eBooks being deleted. So can we get it right here instead of going off half-cocked over something that didn't actually happen?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by akira28

The point is that Amazon can delete any content for any reason without the users consent.

have you heard of any case where Amazon removed legal content purchased from the Kindle Store? No. And that's because Amazon doesn't do that. They do remove illegal content that they happen to have sold. So please don't get your panties in a bunch.

And the other question... why did you (the figurative you meaning everyone who has a Kindle and is concerned/complaining) buy a Kindle knowing Amazon has access to the Kindle via wireless access?

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The article is not about a publisher pulling out and that publisher's eBooks then being removed from Kindles. It about the illegal George Orwell eBooks being deleted. So can we get it right here instead of going off half-cocked over something that didn't actually happen?

That article, one in a series demonstrating Amazon's abuses, brought up a more important topic in this thread titled "Makes me glad my reader is not connected": reading device owners' rights.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

have you heard of any case where Amazon removed legal content purchased from the Kindle Store?

Who said this was illegal content? Random weblogs? Partial quotes from Amazon reps on news blogs?

They certainly didn't inform individual purchasers, "[Book X] has been removed from your Kindle because Amazon discovered it didn't have the right to sell it to you in the first place."

If the books were removed for copyright law violations, the customers who were inconvenienced by that removal should've been informed that this was a legal decision, not a business one (related to, for example, contract re-negotiations where an old version is pulled to make a new one available).

Of course, to do that, they'd have to tell customers "we don't actually check the legality of the sales conducted at our website--and when someone decides to cheat us, we pass that along & you get to deal with the fallout."

Originally Posted by JSWolf

have you heard of any case where Amazon removed legal content purchased from the Kindle Store?

Yes I have, both from reports from the internet and directly from someone who had their Amazon/Kindle account cancelled.

[Abecedary]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The article is not about a publisher pulling out and that publisher's eBooks then being removed from Kindles. It about the illegal George Orwell eBooks being deleted. So can we get it right here instead of going off half-cocked over something that didn't actually happen?

The original articles did not make it clear that the publisher did not have the rights to publish ebook versions of the works, and Amazon's initial comments did not help the situation. When people first asked Amazon about it, they were told that the publisher had "decided" to stop selling those ebooks. Only later did they clarify that the publisher had no rights to sell those books in the first place.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Elsi

I'm with Harry on this. When Amazon discovered that they -- and you -- had been made party to an act of piracy, they immediately set out to correct that problem. By recalling the pirated content which they had delivered to you, they protected you from any future repercussions for possession of the pirated content.

In what way is possession problematic? You can type in the book yourself so possessing the data cannot be problematic.

Amazon has now changed there policy and will no remove the books in these cases. So they seemed not to think that they have to remove the books.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by akira28

Yes I have, both from reports from the internet and directly from someone who had their Amazon/Kindle account cancelled.

Can you point out or quote these reports please?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Abecedary

The original articles did not make it clear that the publisher did not have the rights to publish ebook versions of the works, and Amazon's initial comments did not help the situation. When people first asked Amazon about it, they were told that the publisher had "decided" to stop selling those ebooks. Only later did they clarify that the publisher had no rights to sell those books in the first place.

Were these books pulled form Kindles because the "publisher" stopped selling them or were they pulled when it was found out they were illegal copies?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Of course, to do that, they'd have to tell customers "we don't actually check the legality of the sales conducted at our website--and when someone decides to cheat us, we pass that along & you get to deal with the fallout."

To repeat a post I've made in another forum, Elfwreck, how could Amazon do that?

It is easy enough to check whether or not a book is in the public domain. If you find that it is not, how can you find out whether a particular publisher has the legal right to distribute it? Demand that every publisher produce a copy of their contract with the copyright holder? It might be forged, even if they did!

Realistically, all that Amazon can do is require that a publisher state that they have the legal right to publish the books that they submit to Amazon - and that is precisely what they currently do.

What would you recommend that they do?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

So would you prefer that Amazon knowingly left illegal content on your Kindle, thus leaving you open to a charge of copyright infringement? As you say yourself, the fact that you did not know the material to be infringing is irrelevent.

http://www.lostquilt.com/CopyrightInfringement.html

The US Copyright Office says, "As a general matter, copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner."

Having the book is not copyright infringement.

[HarryT]

But it has been both "reproduced" and "distributed", Tommy. I'm pretty sure that the copy on the Kindle would be illegal.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by HarryT

To repeat a post I've made in another forum, Elfwreck, how could Amazon do that?

I said "Amazon should tell its customers why the books were pulled," not "Amazon should make sure all its books are legit before selling." But I do have suggestions about both.

1) When a book is pulled for copyright infringement (or potential copyright infringement, because I don't think any actual suits have been filed in any of these cases), inform customers, "this ebook has been pulled from our library because we have received legal notification that it is not permitted to be offered for sale. It has been pulled from individual Kindles to avoid making you complicit in a copyright infringement lawsuit."

Personally, I think the likelihood that individual buyers are liable is low; I think that copyright infringement works differently from theft laws, and distribution is illegal but reception is not. However, Amazon's lawyers could think differently. In any case, they should inform customers that the books were pulled to avoid lawsuits, not because Amazon made a better business deal with someone else, or the files were damaged, or whatever else customers might think when they get Amazon's vague notifications.

2) Stop allowing individual uploads of titles without a more stringent confirmation process, possibly involving signed-and-notarized documents, not a webclick that says "yeah, I have the right to distribute this text." Require at least as much ID and legal liability statements as physical publishers demand before publication. Amazon is not Scribd; they shouldn't accept "by clicking on this button, I promise I'm not breaking any laws. Signed, SuperPirate007@haxx0rz.com."

3) Hire someone, or a small pack of someones, to assemble a list of popular classics that aren't in the public domain in the US, and track down the copyright owner for each of those, so they know if they become available as legit ebooks. This could be as small as ~500 titles, or as big as they care to allocate resources for.

This part takes resources on their part--time and money both. But Amazon's entered the publishing industry, and they should be allocating resources towards "what do customers want; what will they pay for; what already exists in the marketplace elsewhere?" Assembling a list of books that don't yet exist as ebooks, but sell very well as pbooks, is not a ridiculous thing for them to do.

This can work in their favor--had Amazon specifically approached the Rand Institute about ebooks, they might've been able to convince the institute that a Kindle edition would be a very profitable thing. Now, even if they do so, a lot of customers will be wary about purchasing it.

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I honestly don't think you have a leg to stand on here.

Someone uploaded material which they did not have the right to distribute. Amazon removed that specific file from the machines which their database told them that it had been sent to, and refunded the customers' money in full. Amazon routines remove content from Kindles - this is well-known. Eg, they remove all subscription content that's older than a certain age.

What's the problem? Nobody's suffered any financial loss. If you want to "blame" someone, blame the people who uploaded the illegal content originally.

I think the problem is that Amazon has shown that they CAN and WILL delete books from YOUR Kindle at THEIR discretion. That is one hell of a line in the sand or slippery slope and they've crossed it/started down it. It doesn't matter to me what the problem is. If Amazon has sold you an illegal copy of a book then by all means they should refund you your money and ask you to delete said copy. But to actually go onto your system and do it for you? Without your knowledge or permission? That is just wrong. No matter what the cause.