Makes me glad my reader is not connected

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by carld

To me it's been a massive overreaction fueled by people looking for any reason to take a shot at Amazon. Not that Amazon hasn't don't things wrong in the past, and probably will in the future, but all this drama over a minor incident is just nutty.

Carl

I'd say, you just don't get it. Period.

It's O.K.. I suppose, for some, this may well be the Theory of Relativity.

Just don't call us "nutty." Because, on this issue, we are all Einsteins, compared to to the Amazon Bozos.

[carld]

Originally Posted by Sonist

I'd say, you just don't get it. Period.

It's O.K.. I suppose, for some, this may well be the Theory of Relativity.

Just don't call us "nutty." Because, on this issue, we are all Einsteins, compared to to the Amazon Bozos.

Oh yes, me so dumb, simple stuff is like big hard theory. 'scues me so's i can stick my finger up my nose huh huh huh.

btw: Thanks for calling me stupid just because I disagree with you ... again.

And I wasn't referring to individual people as nutty, I was referring to this whole manufactured "scandal." It's nonsense.

[HansTWN]

Some people just do not understand the concept that the files that Amazon had no right to sell in the first place are not "his/her files", even if they reside on that person's computer. The users have no right to these files. And my question to them stands --- if Amazon asked you to delete these files, would you do it? Immediately? If you really would, then I have no problems with your position, Amazon's approach does seem heavy handed. However, if you don't, then you are just mad about Amazon removing these illegal files. And I can't sympathize with that.

[Alfy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Some people just do not understand the concept that the files that Amazon had no right to sell in the first place are not "his/her files", even if they reside on that person's computer. The users have no right to these files.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Alfy

Two wrongs don't make a right.

These kindle threads just keep getting better.

It really is hilarious how many people are complaining about Amazon infringing customers rights and how wrong that is while at the same time advocating copyright infringment. And one of the main reasons they advocate copyright infringement is because they think the copyright laws are wrong. So they are in effect advocating two wrongs making a right! They also advocate it because in this brave new digital world it seems if one can get it for free the author should just accept that and give it away for free. Well in this brave new world Amazon can delete your books so shouldn't the customer just accept it?

Please note, I'm not suggesting you are one of these people. Just quoted you because you so simply and brilliantly summed up with I find so funny about these threads.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Alfy

Two wrongs don't make a right.

So that means you have to face the important moral question --- would you delete the file yourself? Immediately?

[krischik]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

The users have no right to these files.

And again an Amazon advocate conveniently forgot the notes and annotations which got deleted as well...

Martin

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

These kindle threads just keep getting better.

It really is hilarious how many people are complaining about Amazon infringing customers rights and how wrong that is while at the same time advocating copyright infringment....

Total nonsense.

What people are objecting to, is:

a corporate entity deleting their legally obtained files, from their personal device, without permission, and without clear legal authority.

Apparently, you are confusing this issue, with the issue of copyright infringement.

There are available remedies to the copyright holders, both against the "publisher" and very likely, against Amazon. These remedies do not include the surreptitious deletion of files from a personal computer.

It is telling, that while you and a few somewhat confused others, are finding people's perfectly reasonable complaints "hilarious," Amazon seems to be aware of the problem, and is rescinding their policy.

[Alfy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

So that means you have to face the important moral question --- would you delete the file yourself? Immediately?

Actually, I completly agree that the right thing to do, would they have told customers in advance, would indeed be to delete the file (and considering the refund, repurchasing the book would have taken minutes). As to whether all customers would have done it is another question. But at least it would not have left so many people with a pit in their stomach at the thought their device and its content is not private (note I don't use the word "owned").

By the way, considering Amazon has stated that, should the situation occur again, they would not repeat the deletions, I think it is fair to say that they themselves have agreed it was wrong. As a result, I'd like to point out that should it occur again, chances are they will go this way, asking customers to delete. Unless anyone else can offer a practical alternative.

An additional thought: having a copy of this book on your Kindle is wrong. Fair enough. But it is not up to Amazon to decide whether or not any file on my Kindle is legal, and it is certainly not up to them to enforce the law. Amazon is not the law, and it was I dislike what happened so much about what happened. I really do not want to live in a world where corporations can decide what is right and what is wrong AND enforce their point of views. What's next? Operating systems that can be searched remotely to check the hardd rives? Auto deletion of any file that does not fit certain criteria??? I'm not being hysterical here: what happened is just a very small tiny step, but it was definitly in the wrong direction.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Total nonsense.

What people are objecting to, is:

a corporate entity deleting their legally obtained files, from their personal device, without permission, and without clear legal authority.

I know what they are objecting to.

They are objecting to something Amazon did that may or may not be illegal and that they feel infringed upon their personal rights.

Originally Posted by Sonist

Apparently, you are confusing this issue, with the issue of copyright infringement.

Not confusing the issue at all. I'm comparing it to their advocacy of copyright infringement.

Lets see, they advocate something that may or may not be legal and that clearly does infringe upon an authors rights. Sound a tad familiar?

Originally Posted by Sonist

There are available remedies to the copyright holders, both against the "publisher" and very likely, against Amazon. These remedies do not include the surreptitious deletion of files from a personal computer.

Now who is confusing the issue with copyright infringement?

Originally Posted by Sonist

It is telling, that while you and a few somewhat confused others, are finding people's perfectly reasonable complaints "hilarious," Amazon seems to be aware of the problem, and is rescinding their policy.

Not finding the complaints themselves hilarious. I'm finding the duality of thought that says Amazon should not infringe upon consumers rights but it is ok for consumers to infringe upon authors rights to be hilarious.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Alfy

......By the way, considering Amazon has stated that, should the situation occur again, they would not repeat the deletions, I think it is fair to say that they themselves have agreed it was wrong.....

As we have no data on Amazon's motives it is only fair to say that Amazon has decided to change their policy, not that they have agreed it was wrong.

If I were to speculate, I would say it is far more likely they changed the policy because they believe it will cost them less in the long run to pay out any copyright infringement issues than it will in lost sales if they continue to delete customers books.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[Andybaby]

Originally Posted by doreenjoy

I have no issue with what Amazon did in this instance, but I think they're underestimating the PR hit they are going to take over this. Even people I know who aren't paranoid are creeped out by the notion that Amazon can reach out and delete material from Kindles. This is a story that will not go away, it's taking on a life of its own, and it's going to ultimately hurt their market share. All IMO, of course. Just reading the tea leaves here.

this is fact.

I personally believe amazon did nothing wrong. but to average joe, they just don't understand.

alot of people are scared of google even.

if you read your EULA, which to be honest, nobody does, they had the right.

and to say that it was illeagal for them to delete it, the EULA proves its not, cause you gave them the right. (just like you promise not to make nuclear weapons with itunes)

anyway, the sale was illegal, they had the right and the responsibility to do everything they did. it was an Illegal work. online illegal works get removed all the time, and if it were possible for them to be removed on peoples computers they would do that too.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

I know what they are objecting to.

They are objecting to something Amazon did that may or may not be illegal and that they feel infringed upon their personal rights....

I am not even sure what your argument is, exactly.

At least in the US, Title 17 of the USC provides ample remedies for copyright holders to enforce their rights (and Title 18 provides for criminal penalties.)

If the copyright holders wished to enforce their rights, they most likely would have settled with both Amazon and the "publisher," which in fact they may have done already. If not, they could have brought it to court, and asked for damages and profits, and costs.

That's why we have IP attorneys, and courts, instead of relying on private enforcers and hackers, to deal with copyright issues.

P.S. Andybaby, the enforceability of such provisions in the EULA are at best debatable, and irrelevant to the main point of the discussion. Obviously, on this point, Amazon has made a decision not to debate it (and I'd guess it would have lost in most states.)

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Alfy

Actually, I completly agree that the right thing to do, would they have told customers in advance, would indeed be to delete the file (and considering the refund, repurchasing the book would have taken minutes). As to whether all customers would have done it is another question. But at least it would not have left so many people with a pit in their stomach at the thought their device and its content is not private (note I don't use the word "owned").

Your wording is a little ambiguous. Do you mean Amazon should have removed the file after telling customers first or they should have waited for the customers to do it?

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Then let us take the next logical step. Let us say Amazon contacts a customer. Tells the customer that he has that illegal file on his Kindle. The customer does not remove it. During the next sync a few days later Amazon discovers the files are still there. If they remove the file now, would that be acceptable? Or should they just leave it, no matter what?

Personally, I think in that case it would be acceptable. They have stated why the user has to delete it (always provided there is a legal reason!) and they have given the user time to delete it himself.

But it doesn't mean I must like the situation. I also personally think that Amazon shouldn't be allowed to look on your device, period.