eBook settlement credit is on the way

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by Conan46

How did you check this? It takes me to a page asking for my gift card # and pin # when I want to check the balance.

1) Go to BN.com and sign in

2) Mouse over the 'My Account' drop down menu on the left side of the page. Select 'Manage Account'.

3) Click 'Manage Gift Cards and Credits for Nook Content'

4) The page that loads should have both your current balance and an option to add gift cards.

If you received an email stating you have a credit, but you see nothing listed just give it some time. I had to wait a day for the credit to actually register.

Why this isn't under 'Payments' from the drop down menu is beyond me, BN has twice relaunched their website within the last year or so. Both times there were numerous issues.

Why they felt they needed to add 'for Nook content' when gift cards and credits will be applied to -any- order from BN is also beyond me. Well I could take a guess and say it's because they want to push the failing Nook as much as possible.

[snape]

Originally Posted by cadele

Hi Snape.

On the buy screen on the bottom left, you need to indicate a payment method even if the store credit covers the cost of the book. I usually select PayPal (you don't go to PayPal after doing this) and then proceed as usual. Store credit will be applied for the purchase. If the book is couponable, there is a spot on the upper right side to enter the coupon code before final purchase.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the tip, it worked! I was able to complete the purchase and download my book.

[Conan46]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

1) Go to BN.com and sign in

2) Mouse over the 'My Account' drop down menu on the left side of the page. Select 'Manage Account'.

3) Click 'Manage Gift Cards and Credits for Nook Content'

4) The page that loads should have both your current balance and an option to add gift cards.

If you received an email stating you have a credit, but you see nothing listed just give it some time. I had to wait a day for the credit to actually register.

Why this isn't under 'Payments' from the drop down menu is beyond me, BN has twice relaunched their website within the last year or so. Both times there were numerous issues.

Why they felt they needed to add 'for Nook content' when gift cards and credits will be applied to -any- order from BN is also beyond me. Well I could take a guess and say it's because they want to push the failing Nook as much as possible.

Yes, that works, Thanks!

[rdfry]

Originally Posted by Robotech_Master

Actually, it's Judge Cote's opinion, which was upheld on appeal and declined review by the Supreme Court, so as far as legal precedent goes, it's proven fact. From page 5, added emphasis mine:



You're entitled to your opinion, but when a case is decided by a court of law, and not overturned, then guess what? When you cite it, you can't be accused of expressing "pure opinion." You're expressing something that is legally considered a fact.

*drops mic*

That dude is an Apple shill. He thinks Apple can do no wrong.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by rdfry

That dude is an Apple shill. He thinks Apple can do no wrong.

In general, ad homiem attacks are a sign of either intellectual laziness or dishonesty.

[pwalker8]

Weird, got a check for $115 in the mail that said it was for the Apple settlement. Anyone here wants to send me money, just let me know and I'll set up a PO box.

[John F]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

In general, ad homiem attacks are a sign of either intellectual laziness or dishonesty.

I think the point that you are missing is that for some people, Amazon can do no wrong ...

[odamizu]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Weird, got a check for $115 in the mail that said it was for the Apple settlement ...

That's great! The BN FAQ page said they would be in the form of "postcard checks." Is it the perforated thing where you have to tear off the sides to reveal the inside?

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by odamizu

That's great! The BN FAQ page said they would be in the form of "postcard checks." Is it the perforated thing where you have to tear off the sides to reveal the inside?

There are checks that look like junk mail postcards. One piece of card stock with nothing to tear. I received a rebate that way recently. You can read about something similar here. It wouldn't surprise me if that is what B&N are using.

[odamizu]

Originally Posted by jhowell

There are checks that look like junk mail postcards. One piece of card stock with nothing to tear. I received a rebate that way recently ....

Yes, I've received rebate checks like that as well. I'm hoping this is not what they're using. If it gets lost or stolen, what recourse would we have?

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by odamizu

That's great! The BN FAQ page said they would be in the form of "postcard checks." Is it the perforated thing where you have to tear off the sides to reveal the inside?

That's how my check came.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by John F

quoting things out of context does not prove an ad hominem attack. His response to my discussion of legal issues was simply "he's an Apple shill", with no discussion of the actual legal issue that was being discussed. That's the definition of ad homiem attack.

I was commenting on the question of "what am I missing" and my reply went into considerable depth as to why I thought that Amazon was dropping such companies from their affiliate program (yea, you dropped the other two paragraphs of my comment from you quote).

ad hominem is defined as -
"1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining."

My full comment (including the much larger part you edited out) was about why I thought Amazon was doing what they were doing. If I had simply said that for some people, Amazon can do no wrong and that was it, it would have been ad hominem since I was simply discussing the person rather than the position.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

My full comment (including the much larger part you edited out) was about why I thought Amazon was doing what they were doing. If I had simply said that for some people, Amazon can do no wrong and that was it, it would have been ad hominem since I was simply discussing the person rather than the position.

No, wrong on your part. If your much larger part that got edited out would have made sense in the first place then it wouldn't have been necessary to point out that Amazon did anything wrong. And since it was merely your opinion you had no right to personally attack those that share a different opinion. What you said was that everybody that doesn't share your opinion is an Amazon lover that never ever thinks Amazon does anything wrong.

Legally speaking, your possibly right opinion has a lot less value than a possibly wrong opinion of a judge that went unchallenged even by the Supreme Court. And then you come up with this crazy idea that the Supreme Court may have had enough reason to NOT set precedent so it wouldn't become the law for the future. The Supreme Court doesn't have to waste time stating the obvious. (To clarify for you: The obvious here means no new law needed as the old laws covered it quite well)

And sure, keep telling yourself that every little thing Apple did (concerning the collusion) was perfectly legal. In the end, the sum of all those individually legal pieces ended up with Apple being guilty. It only took a tiny little bit of illegal collusion in this context to turn all those other legal pieces illegal.

Apple didn't raise the prices after all, all they did was give the publishers an illegal tool to do so themselves.

[pwalker8]

Well, I came up with my solution to do with the money, binge buy!

I pick up a lot of backlist books and specialty books that I had my eye on. 25 in all. Nothing that had triggered the "Oh, I've got to have that" impulse but a lot of books that fill in some of the blank spaces in my library. For example, I had lost interest in Novik's Temeraire series after book 5, but with the positive reviews of the final book in the series, I decided to go ahead and finish the series up and snarfed up the remaining 4 books.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

No, wrong on your part. If your much larger part that got edited out would have made sense in the first place then it wouldn't have been necessary to point out that Amazon did anything wrong. And since it was merely your opinion you had no right to personally attack thise that share a different opinion. What you said was that everybody that doesn't share your opinion is an Amazon lover that never ever thinks Amazon does anything wrong.

Legally speaking, your possibly right opinion has a lot less value than a possibly wrong opinion of a judge that went unchallenged even by the Supreme Court. And then you come up with this crazy idea that the Supreme Court may have had enough reason to NOT set precedent so it wouldn't become the law for the future. The Supreme Court doesn't have to waste time stating the obvious.

And sure, keep telling yourself that every little thing Apple did (concerning the collusion) was perfectly legal. In the end, the sum of all those individually legal pieces ended up with Apple being guilty. It only took a tiny little bit of illegal collusion in this context to turn all those other legal pieces illegal.

Apple didn't raise the prices after all, all they did was give the publishers an illegal tool to do so themselves.

I'm thinking you really haven't been paying much attention to what has been going on with the Supreme Court since Scalia's death. The deadlocked court and status of the 4-4 ties have been a major topic. There is some speculation that they may not even fill out their docket next term and will likely only hear cases which are less likely to be deadlocked. This article speculates that we will see a lot of copyright and patent cases next term, because they aren't likely to trigger such divisions.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/divided-...end-1466328601


Once again, no matter how much you want it to be all about Apple, the question here isn't Apple, it's the law and the American legal system.