So I bought a blacklisted Kindle off Craigslist

[SameOldStory]

Children refusing to grow up.

In todays world it's all about "What I want". If you can justify it, it's OK.

Do they remind anyone of the kids in The Lord of the Flies?

[PharaohsVizier]

Originally Posted by krazy4katz

So the fact that Amazon told him they blacklisted it because it was either lost or stolen and the fact that the seller can no longer be contacted doesn't make you in the least suspicious???

It does make me suspicious, but you are jumping to conclusions, it could very well be lost.

[dougmwpsu]

Originally Posted by PharaohsVizier

Again you are assuming it is stolen.

We don't have to assume anything. Legally, lost is the same as stolen if you don't make a reasonable effort to return to the original owner. Doesn't anyone remember the iPhone4 prototype drama? Finder's keepers does not hold up outside of grade school.

[Robert Minneman]

As mentioned by others I too find it interesting that everyone assumes that the device was stolen.

Here's a 'some what' reasonable scenario that involves no theft, just stupidity:

The seller receives the Kindle as a gift during a birthday party, at the same party, he receives a corresponding Sony model eReader. Through the celebration the Kindle is misplaced and the next morning, hung over, the seller realizes he can't find the Kindle, assumes it stolen, is too embarrassed to let the giver know, but reports the device as lost/stolen. It gets black listed, and the seller moves on to activating his Sony.

A few days later, hang over gone, the seller finds the Kindle and smacks his forehead with palm, and decides, that all-in-all, he REALLY likes the Sony and decides to sell the Kindle, never bothering to report to Amazon that the device was found.

The seller sells the device not realizing it isn't going to work, and the buyer buys it, not knowing that the device is reported missing/stolen.

Buyer finds the device black listed, tries to contact the original seller, the seller not wanting to deal with any BS, just doesn't bother answering or contacting the buyer. He's got his 120 bucks and he's thinking of the buyer, "Too bad you don't like the Kindle or whatever, save your money and by a Sony, I don't want to deal with your crap..."

A reasonable, though admitedly somewhat unlikely, circumstance.

It involves no real breaks in morality or ethics, just laziness, ignorance, and recalcitrance.

All we know for sure is that the Kindle was reported as lost/stolen.

We really DO NOT NOT FOR A CERTAINTY, that the device was actually lost or stolen.

Amazon isn't interested in helping. The seller isn't interested in helping. All we have is an ambiguous status of the device, and the certainty that it can't be registered.

I don't think the OP needs to contact the police to maintain his "morality", and seeking "revenge" in this case could result in falsely accusing someone of a crime, which is probably just as bad "morally" as knowingly purchasing stolen goods (which I don't think is the case in this instance).

Anyway, in my not so humble opinion there is no moral delimma here, just a lingering cloud of ignorance...

[PharaohsVizier]

Originally Posted by dougmwpsu

We don't have to assume anything. Legally, lost is the same as stolen if you don't make a reasonable effort to return to the original owner. Doesn't anyone remember the iPhone4 prototype drama? Finder's keepers does not hold up outside of grade school.

Yes, but he did contact Amazon already, so he did make a reasonable effort to return the device. The guy who had the iPhone 4 wouldn't have been caught up in the mess if he called Apple... I highly doubt the police expect him to go door to door asking.

[ProfCrash]

If he contacted Amazon and they did not say they would send him a shipping label so he could return the Kindle to him, then he has no reason to try and return it. Amazon should have sent him a label, he shouldn't have to send it back to Amazon in his dime.

I still think he should report it to the police.

[jackinthesouthba]

A few people mentioned receiving stolen property. One of the elements of a receiving stolen property charge is foreknowledge: knowing that the item is stolen at the time the person is buying it. Clearly the OP did not know it was blacklisted as lost/stolen at the time he was buying it. In fact, he does not know that it is stolen now.

As to reporting it to the police, there is no law that says that one has to report a possible crime. The OP has made a good faith effort by reaching out to Amazon. The onus is on Amazon to act.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

I still think he should report it to the police.

This crime, if it is a crime, is an internet crime.

Now, where did the crime occur? Dunno. Depends on the crime. Theft of the Kindle - better contact Amazon, make them dig through their records, with the almost certain likelihood that the theft did not occur within the jurisdiction of this particular set of cops. Now what? Send the Kindle off to the cops at the location of the presumed crime? Somehow, I don't think it likely.

Who is the criminal? Dunno, maybe could find out from Craigslist. Maybe could find out that whoever he is, it's not who he told Craig. Probably would find out that he's located in that other jurisdiction.

Does anyone seriously think that even a small town cop has the time or incentive to do this? There is absolutely zilcho chance that if he reports this to the cops, anything happens other than the Kindle winds up in the police pound, until it is sold at auction a year from now. For five bucks. Which doesn't even cover the costs of the paperwork.

This crime, if it is a crime, is one of those small time crimes that only get dealt with if the police catch the criminal in the act. Shoplifiting, pickpocketing, hubcap theft.

I had my hubcaps stolen once when we had parked on the street, & didn't know about it till the cops showed up at my door and asked me if I was missing anything. Turned out the dopes who stole them did it right across the street from a cop. It took me a couple of hours to go down to the station & wade through the paperwork to get them back. But when it came to prosecution, it was silently but effectively communicated to me that as far as the cops were concerned, the case was closed.

Now, clearly, we should all avoid facilitating smalltime criminals. We shouldn't buy things that are probably stolen. But most things that are sold, at flea markets, garage sales, on Craigslist or eBay, aren't stolen, even though some small proportion of them undoubtedly are. You can't go around thinking anything you buy outside a department store is stolen.

This guy misjudged the situation. If the Kindle had been "new in box" at half the going price, that would have been a suspicious circumstance. But $20 bucks off? If you think about it, this is really a clever criminal we are dealing with - he hit the sweet spot at the lowest point, in the sense that he offered the Kindle at a price that was not so low as to be suspicious, and just low enough to allow a potential buyer to think that he stumbled on an easy and legitimate $20 discount. Or at least, he wanted to believe that and had just enough latitude to do so.

And it bit him in the moderator. So that should be an end on it.

[J. Strnad]

Actually, as I think on it, "lost" or "stolen" don't matter: The seller misrepresented the product. He sold it as something that worked, when it doesn't (because it's blacklisted). The buyer should have the option to return the non-working device for a full refund.

As for having to know that something is stolen before you are in possession of "stolen property"--it doesn't matter in the USA. I didn't know that the canoe I'd bought was stolen, but it was, and I lost it. C'est la vie.

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't know how it works where you are, but in the UK at least, stolen property still belongs to the original owner even if someone's bought it in good faith.

Harry,

It is exactly the same here. In fact over on POTN (http://www.photography-on-the.net) we had a situation where a young firefighter, as I recall in the military, bought a rather expensive Canon lense at a fair but not suspicious price. Then out of the blue, I forget the exact confluence of events but he was contacted by the police in the state & city where it had been stolen from requiring he return the lense, at his expense. He had no legal leg to stand on because it was indeed stolen. He was not complaining but rather posting so others need to make sure they know the source when buying used gear...he is young had a new baby on the way and had been saving for almost 2-yrs for the lense and wanted to for the new baby, their first....he spent nearly $2000 for it...so guess what? We all got together, made a deal with Helen Oster at Adorama and they offered to sell it to us at pretty much their cost...well, we raised far more cash than expected so because they guy did the right thing and was also a super nice member of the forum, we were able to raise the funds as a group, in ONE DAY and get him the newest version of the lense, nearly a $3000 piece of glass...it was a FUN thing to do. It was a wonderful thing to see a group come together to help someone out who really did the right thing. Too often in this world people who do the right thing are PUNISHED in some way, I see it here all the time.

But it happens, we all trust people and get screwed more than once in life...but it helps to remember people are basically good and honest so as long as we do the right thing, it will always come back to us in spades....

There is no such thing as "finder's keeper's" on the legal books...if you find something you are required to hand it over to the police (remember the infamous "found" Kindle at an airport and the OP needed to ask if he could keep the thing?) then if nobody ever claims it in specific period of time, then it's yours and the cops will return it to you.

I think it's awful to get cheated when buying a used item...and it's not like the price was too good to be true...but it happens. Do the right thing, and use it as a way to help others avoid the same thing happening.

I have been in the antiques business since I was 7-yrs old, so 43yrs and it happens...but usually you can tell if something might be hot. I once had a potential customer offer to trade me a stack of seven $20 Gold Eagle coins for a bedroom set I was selling...at the time the coins were worth around $6000ish and the bedroom set was only $5200...I politely declined, notified the police as it just did not feel right...turned out, the coins were hot and I saved myself a huge headache once she was busted by the cops...

[Xanthe]

Man, a mountain is being made about a molehill again, with morals/ethics once again being dragged in and judgement passed.

The OP bought the Kindle in good faith. The price it was offered at is the sort of price one would offer if one bought an item, found out that one didn't like it, and wanted to sell it to get at least as close to the original price as realistic. I'd be more suspicious of a new Kindle being offered for $50.

The OP contacted Amazon. Unless I missed a post in this thread, the rep didn't tell him/her to return the blacklisted Kindle to them. So the Kindle is the OP's to do with has he/she wishes. The OP now has a Kindle that can't use the Whispernet and is merely another ereader and can use it as such. Use a program that will convert books to the Kindle format and at least get some use from it.

We don't know if the Craigslist seller was a thief who stole it from the original purchaser, or the original purchaser who reported it as stolen in order to get another Kindle. Either way, it's immaterial. The OP isn't going to get the money back, the seller isn't going to take it back (if the seller can even be located again), the original purchaser has gotten a new Kindle, and Amazon has probably been reimbursed the cost of the Kindle from the shipper's insurance. To go through the rigamarole of trying to get all that reversed will cost them more than the $120 the OP shelled out.

As others have stated, contact Craigslist and give them the particulars of the sale and the person involved. That way you will have acted as a conscientious member of the site. You already contacted Amazon. You've covered the bases. There's no point in contacting the police; the money amount is just too low for them to realistically do anything about it, not to mention the jurisdictional questions and the like. Keep the Kindle and let the experience be a lesson learned about buying from third-party sites.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

There is no such thing as "finder's keeper's" on the legal books...if you find something you are required to hand it over to the police (remember the infamous "found" Kindle at an airport and the OP needed to ask if he could keep the thing?) then if nobody ever claims it in specific period of time, then it's yours and the cops will return it to you.

There are different kinds of "found property," & exactly what duty one has to turn over property depends on statutory law in the particular jurisdiction. (At common law there was generally no such duty.) Property that is probably abandoned is one thing, property that is obviously mislaid is another. And as a practical matter, value plays a role. The cops don't want a Bic pen. The only time I found anything of obvious value & turned it over to the cops, they had nothing to say about my getting it if it went unclaimed by the owner. But it was a wallet with ID in it so there was no point, I suppose.

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by Xanthe

Man, a mountain is being made about a molehill again, with morals/ethics once again being dragged in and judgement passed.

The OP bought the Kindle in good faith. The price it was offered at is the sort of price one would offer if one bought an item, found out that one didn't like it, and wanted to sell it to get at least as close to the original price as realistic. I'd be more suspicious of a new Kindle being offered for $50.

The OP contacted Amazon. Unless I missed a post in this thread, the rep didn't tell him/her to return the blacklisted Kindle to them. So the Kindle is the OP's to do with has he/she wishes. The OP now has a Kindle that can't use the Whispernet and is merely another ereader and can use it as such. Use a program that will convert books to the Kindle format and at least get some use from it.

We don't know if the Craigslist seller was a thief who stole it from the original purchaser, or the original purchaser who reported it as stolen in order to get another Kindle. Either way, it's immaterial. The OP isn't going to get the money back, the seller isn't going to take it back (if the seller can even be located again), the original purchaser has gotten a new Kindle, and Amazon has probably been reimbursed the cost of the Kindle from the shipper's insurance. To go through the rigamarole of trying to get all that reversed will cost them more than the $120 the OP shelled out.

As others have stated, contact Craigslist and give them the particulars of the sale and the person involved. That way you will have acted as a conscientious member of the site. You already contacted Amazon. You've covered the bases. There's no point in contacting the police; the money amount is just too low for them to realistically do anything about it, not to mention the jurisdictional questions and the like. Keep the Kindle and let the experience be a lesson learned about buying from third-party sites.

None of what you wrote matters....Amazon is NOT law enoorcement and is in not position to demand or dictate the return of the device, they can, however inform law enforcement as to who now is in posession of the property. And the OP, once informed it is stolen/lost property is bound by law to turn it over to the law enforcement. OK? None of the rest of the "story" matters. It is potentially a felony to possess stolen property once you are fully aware it is stolen. And is it crosses state lines it may or may not be considered a federal felony under the jurisdiction of the FBI. No problem if the OP wants to live with the potential of that over his/her head...

There is the one assumption, it might have simply been lost, and there is still the obligation in any civilized society to return lost property once it is known there is a way to get it returned to the proper owner...even if the OP paid for it, it is now known it's NOT THE PROPERTY OF THE OP. It's the risk one takes doing business with people you do not know.

Accept that or not...but it's attitudes like yours which show what a pathetic world we live in and why the US in general is despised by the rest of the planet and looked as as only a cash cow to be bilked because of the avarice and greed which put us into the position we are in today as a society/economy.

[brecklundin]

If ANYONE cares here is a relevant thread about this same sort of issue:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...=stolen+70-200

have fun and keep deluding yourself...

EDIT:

from the attorney helping the person who bought the lense beings explaining the issue:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...&postcount=403

[PharaohsVizier]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

None of what you wrote matters....Amazon is NOT law enoorcement and is in not position to demand or dictate the return of the device, they can, however inform law enforcement as to who now is in posession of the property.

I think you are the one deluding yourself, it is clear that in this situation Amazon has the right to do both these things. If Amazon has the right to remotely blacklist the device, the owner has probably relinquished ownership and given control to Amazon. As the new rightful owner, Amazon has the right to demand the return or just leave it in the hands of the OP.