PRS-600 Articles like this

[daffy4u]

Originally Posted by scottjl

keep drinking the amazon kool-ade. you may be happy with it, but it's our right no to be. be happy there are organizations like the EFF out there looking for some of your rights or you wouldn't have any at all.

Amazon kool-aid, paranoia kool-aid, it's all kool-aid. I do support EFF but not everything is a big conspiracy. Sometimes and ebook reader is just and ebook reader.

With that, I take my tin foil hat and depart.

[ifonline]

Exactly. Scottjl, to borrow your horse-beat-to-death phrase: you can keep drinking the ultra-paranoid Kool-Aid all you want. It's okay... some really nice men in black suits and aviator sunglasses will be by shortly to "check" on you. I would recommend letting them in quickly so the neighbors don't get a chance to watch.

[scottjl]

ya know what? i pointed out an article and out came the trolls to beat down anyone who disagrees with them. sheesh. why don't you both take your attitudes and tin-foil hats and... i pointed out that sony does not spy on it's users, and sony does not revoke your ebooks. you can't dispute that fact. begone trolls.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by scottjl

ya know what? i pointed out an article and out came the trolls to beat down anyone who disagrees with them. sheesh. why don't you both take your attitudes and tin-foil hats and... i pointed out that sony does not spy on it's users, and sony does not revoke your ebooks. you can't dispute that fact. begone trolls.

The books that Amazon revoked were uploaded illegally.......and refunds were given. How was that wrong? They were notified by the LEGAL owners of the copyright, and did the right thing.

The fact that Amazon MAY be able to spy on me, doesn't mean it IS spying on me.......big difference there........

[crovakiet]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

The books that Amazon revoked were uploaded illegally.......and refunds were given. How was that wrong? They were notified by the LEGAL owners of the copyright, and did the right thing.

The fact that Amazon MAY be able to spy on me, doesn't mean it IS spying on me.......big difference there........

Another complacent Kindle consumer supporting Amazon's remote deletion capability/'feature' on the Kindle. The methods in which they handled the situation was wrong. And yes, I believe every person who actually owns and actively uses a Kindle is in support of this 'feature'. If they truly were against this feature, they would have obtained any another reader device and basically tell/show Amazon that what was preventing you from using the device was the remote deletion. I have never owned or seen non-trial software/hardware just be there one minute and gone the next, unless you count viruses/worms.

I find this support of the Kindle ironic coming from someone who has in their signature 'Freedom is not free........its always been paid for by the blood of our military.' In this case, you should be fighting Amazon in regards to freeing your device from their stupid 'deletion feature'.

Again, I say speak with your wallet and stop letting companies walk all over you.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by crovakiet

Another complacent Kindle consumer supporting Amazon's remote deletion capability/'feature' on the Kindle. The methods in which they handled the situation was wrong. And yes, I believe every person who actually owns and actively uses a Kindle is in support of this 'feature'. If they truly were against this feature, they would have obtained any another reader device and basically tell/show Amazon that what was preventing you from using the device was the remote deletion. I have never owned or seen non-trial software/hardware just be there one minute and gone the next, unless you count viruses/worms.

I find this support of the Kindle ironic coming from someone who has in their signature 'Freedom is not free........its always been paid for by the blood of our military.' In this case, you should be fighting Amazon in regards to freeing your device from their stupid 'deletion feature'.

Again, I say speak with your wallet and stop letting companies walk all over you.

Oh, excuse me!

Their "stupid deletion feature" and the method in which they handled the situation may not be right in your eyes, but it was it mine.

Pray tell......how would YOU have handled it?

Again, the books were uploaded to them ILLEGALLY, the LEGAL owners asked them to remove them, which they did.

AND compensated any buyers.

If you have a problem with their methods, you have a right not to buy their products.

You do NOT have a right to tell ME how I should handle it.

Thats "freedom".

The right to make your own choices.

[crovakiet]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Oh, excuse me!

Their "stupid deletion feature" and the method in which they handled the situation may not be right in your eyes, but it was it mine.

Pray tell......how would YOU have handled it?

Again, the books were uploaded to them ILLEGALLY, the LEGAL owners asked them to remove them, which they did.

AND compensated any buyers.

If you have a problem with their methods, you have a right not to buy their products.

You do NOT have a right to tell ME how I should handle it.

Thats "freedom".

The right to make your own choices.

You state that Amazon compensated buyers as well as a public apology. Although we hear about the student who had their book deleted as well as their notes, what kind of apology and compensation would you give to say a literature student who had all their notes on the Kindle when the book happened to be deleted with everything in it and that their thesis on this particular book was a major part of their grade or possibility of graduation i.e. doctoral theses/dissertation? I would say that this student was stupid for not having redundant notes placed somewhere else, but alas the damage was done and it will be wholly dependent on the professor/panel whether there would be leniency in a situation such as this.

Freedom means you have the right to make your own choices, even stupid ones. That's my perspective and not yours, but when you make stupid ones over and over again, sooner or later that 'freedom' will only involve stupid choice A, stupid choice B and/or stupid choice C.

The fact that Kindle users choose to buy the Kindle even with this remote deletion feature amazes me. Their complacency is akin to the passivity of citizens letting Hitler come to power albeit to an extreme. THEY CHOSE TO BE PASSIVE. Hitler burned books that in his regime were 'illegal contraband'...Amazon already did it. What next? A choice between remote deletion of whole books or something less intrusive such as remote deletion/insertion of specific text? Hey it's a choice is it not?

You are excused.

[ifonline]

You didn't answer the question. Amazon was forced to act on the illegal upload of the book at the request/demand of the legal copyright owner. That included recovering copies already distributed.

So... how would you have handled that? It's really a simple question. No need to avoid it.

Beyond that, are you aware of any instance where Amazon infringed on the purchase of legal books? And are you aware of any instance where Amazon abused the information collected on the purchasers?

You are jumping way too far off in the deep end. To connect Amazon to Hitler is incredibly absurd, but then so is your conspiracy and privacy argument in general.

Unreal.

[ifonline]

Originally Posted by scottjl

ya know what? i pointed out an article and out came the trolls to beat down anyone who disagrees with them. sheesh. why don't you both take your attitudes and tin-foil hats and... i pointed out that sony does not spy on it's users, and sony does not revoke your ebooks. you can't dispute that fact. begone trolls.

I find this really interesting. You comment on us because we are "beating down" on you, and yet you put us down by calling us trolls. So it's okay for you to "beat down" on us, but not the other way around?

Pathetic. The world doesn't revolve around you or your opinion.

[crovakiet]

Originally Posted by ifonline

You didn't answer the question. Amazon was forced to act on the illegal upload of the book at the request/demand of the legal copyright owner. That included recovering copies already distributed.

So... how would you have handled that? It's really a simple question. No need to avoid it.

Beyond that, are you aware of any instance where Amazon infringed on the purchase of legal books? And are you aware of any instance where Amazon abused the information collected on the purchasers?

You are jumping way too far off in the deep end. To connect Amazon to Hitler is incredibly absurd, but then so is your conspiracy and privacy argument in general.

Unreal.

In my haste I forgot to answer the question she posed in her post as I was too preoccupied with freedom and choice. What I would have done is issue a user authorized public product recall. Essentially it would go out to all Kindle devices as a notification letting them know that the product that they had was not in accordance with the legal owners wishes and that the user would thus be compensated if the product was returned with an apology regarding future business/correspondence with them. It would be the same scenario if a publisher happened to sell hardcover/paperback books that weren't in legal accordance. There would be a cease and desist as well as a product recall, but it would be highly improbable that they would go to each consumer's home and physically take the product which Amazon essentially did.

To make a connection to Hitler is not absurd in the slightest. Extreme as it may be, that is what happens when complacency is the norm. Little steps, little steps.

Hitler: 'GERMANIC SPIRIT!'
Complacency: 'HURRAY'
Hitler: 'Burn books in order to get rid of the Jewish directive/perspective'
Complacency: 'Ummm....alright I guess?'
Hitler: 'Rounding up the Jews!'
Complacency: 'Ummm...I guess...do I question why here?'
Hitler: 'Getting rid of the Jews (but not explicitly stating that they were being slaughtered, hidden feature)'
Complacency: 'Were just getting rid of them, not killing them even though we 'hear and smell' camps'. Maybe we should do something? Nah...we already let him go this far...

Yeah, too little too late. All it takes are little steps until one big step and by then usually it's too late. Don't give an inch to Amazon. Defending a remote deletion feature is foolhardy. There isn't an advantage in having it, only negatives.

[ifonline]

Wow. Now you're linking Amazon recalling a book to the mass slaughter of Jews. You are incredible. Truly incredible.

So, to follow your strange logic, I suppose that because I don't have a problem with Amazon's actions, I should now be worried that Amazon will be stopping by my house to kill my first born child? Or maybe Amazon's henchmen will throw me in a black vehicle in the middle of the night to never be seen again? Or wait... I get it now... Amazon will round up all Jewish men, women, and children and burn them alive in ovens or gas them to death in "showers."

Got it.

Strange. Now that I think of it, I did see a concentration camp with a sign that reads "Amazonschwitz." Damn. I wish I had your intelligence to have seen the writing on the wall a lot sooner.

So... what color is the sky in your world? Oh, and if you don't have enough tin foil, I would be glad to spare some. It sounds like you'll be needing it.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by crovakiet

To make a connection to Hitler is not absurd in the slightest. Extreme as it may be, that is what happens when complacency is the norm. Little steps, little steps.

Hitler: 'GERMANIC SPIRIT!'
Complacency: 'HURRAY'
Hitler: 'Burn books in order to get rid of the Jewish directive/perspective'
Complacency: 'Ummm....alright I guess?'
Hitler: 'Rounding up the Jews!'
Complacency: 'Ummm...I guess...do I question why here?'
Hitler: 'Getting rid of the Jews (but not explicitly stating that they were being slaughtered, hidden feature)'
Complacency: 'Were just getting rid of them, not killing them even though we 'hear and smell' camps'. Maybe we should do something? Nah...we already let him go this far...

Yeah, too little too late. All it takes are little steps until one big step and by then usually it's too late. Don't give an inch to Amazon. Defending a remote deletion feature is foolhardy. There isn't an advantage in having it, only negatives.

Wait........Is this Alan Kaufman??? NO, really, is it??

There has got to be a full moon out this week. There is no other explanation for the silliness of you people.

I'm so done with you, and this thread.

Enjoy your evening, and please.....don't befoul the Jewish holocaust experience with your over the top paranoia any further.

[Haesslich]

Originally Posted by daffy4u

I have some extra tin foil I'd be happy to share with you.

Sure. Sony DID do something stupid (rootkits) but backed off on it, and removed the rootkit-using CD's from the market, and have since stopped deploying them.

Amazon's yet to do anything like that with the Kindle - they just promise 'not to do it again', at least not the way they did it before. As I said, the article's got issues... but Amazon has other issues. At least Sony stopped doing that shit. And that's one reason I'm not going to buy a Kindle - on top of the restrictive DRM scheme.

Beyond that, the issue remains: they have a backdoor to remove books, and have already done so. There's nothing to really stop them from doing it again, beyond an unsubstantiated promise - it's not like they're under a contract which would prevent them from pulling a book for any reason, nor are there any legal consequences to doing so that would prevent them from doing so again. The 1984 case was due to legal concerns - that I can understand. However, to completely kill the file remotely versus merely revoking authorizations to open the file, or sending a warning saying 'this book is violating copyright, we will be replacing this copy with a legal one' is what concerns me... as there is literally nothing stopping them from doing that to any book that I have on the device, at least not physically. If there'd at least been a message 'this book is not licensed: delete? Y/N' prompt to have the option to keep the book on my device until they had a replacement ready then I might feel a little more sanguine - but I don't even have the option to refuse in this case.

Imagine what would happen if Stephen King suddenly announced that he was going B&N exclusive - would you be happy to have those books automatically deleted by Amazon if they decided to do so, even if you were refunded the money? It's one thing to say 'the person who published this book didn't have the rights to it', but to remote-delete files from my library because of it, versus replacing it with a legal copy automatically or sending a warning out with a request to delete the book is something that keeps me from Amazon's device. I don't call this paranoia - at least not as much as I call it displeasure with the company over the concept of 'who owns my device and my library'. I've bought a license to view that book, and having Amazon decide that I can't own the book (and then delete it for me without my prompting, or a way to decline) is something that I won't pay for.

[netseeker]

Ultra-paranoid Kool-Aid, Hitler, book-burning, trolls ????!!!!!

Not this again!

Something is going terribly wrong in this thread.

Please don't force us to close this thread.

Michael
(moderator)

[scottjl]

oh please close it. i posted the article to be informative, it was hijacked long ago.