Amazon Censorship Expands

[elcreative]

This is part of Amazon's contract for publishing eBooks:

3 Term and Termination

The term of this Agreement will begin upon your acceptance of it and will continue until it is terminated by us or by you. We are entitled to terminate this Agreement and your access to your Program account at any time without advance notice to you. You are entitled to terminate at any time by your provision to us of notice in accordance with our then-current procedures for account termination, in which event we will cease selling your Digital Books within 5 business days from the date you provide us notice of termination. We may also suspend your Program account at any time with or without notice to you, for any reason in our discretion. Following termination or suspension, we may fulfill any customer orders for your Digital Books pending as of the date of termination or suspension, and we may continue to maintain digital copies of your Digital Books in order to provide continuing access to or re-downloads of your Digital Books or otherwise support customers who have purchased a Digital Book prior to termination or suspension. The following provisions of this Agreement will survive termination of this Agreement: Sections 1, 3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and any other provisions that, by their nature, are intended to survive. All rights to Digital Books acquired by customers will survive termination.

Bold highlights added by me... this basically states that they can do as they like and may or may not choose to give you reasons. As a set of T&Cs, it may very well stink but surely you read them before getting Amazon to publish your book... and you had the option not to proceed if you objected to these T&Cs...

Originally Posted by jamthecat

I guess contracts mean nothing, be they implied, imprinted or written in indelible ink. Amazon's a private company that can do as it likes. And I'm sure you would not mind your bank feeling the same way about your mortgage or car loan or credit card agreement. They can change the rate ANY time they please and the contract be damned. Right.

[jamthecat]

Originally Posted by THE TERMINATOR

They are a private company they can do what ever they want

They can't kill anyone. They can't maintain a monopoly. They can't send you a book you did not order in place of one you wanted and tell you that's what you're getting, whether you like it or not. They can't come into your Kindle and take back a book you bought (per a legal settlement they made with someone they'd actually done that to). There are a LOT of things a private (or publicly traded) company cannot do. To take the attitude that they can is silly and denotes a sheep's mentality. And I ain't no sheep; I'm a water dragon mixed with a meaner-than-mean Leo. RRRROAWRRR.

[jamthecat]

Originally Posted by elcreative

This is part of Amazon's contract for publishing eBooks:

3 Term and Termination

The term of this Agreement will begin upon your acceptance of it and will continue until it is terminated by us or by you. We are entitled to terminate this Agreement and your access to your Program account at any time without advance notice to you. You are entitled to terminate at any time by your provision to us of notice in accordance with our then-current procedures for account termination, in which event we will cease selling your Digital Books within 5 business days from the date you provide us notice of termination. We may also suspend your Program account at any time with or without notice to you, for any reason in our discretion. Following termination or suspension, we may fulfill any customer orders for your Digital Books pending as of the date of termination or suspension, and we may continue to maintain digital copies of your Digital Books in order to provide continuing access to or re-downloads of your Digital Books or otherwise support customers who have purchased a Digital Book prior to termination or suspension. The following provisions of this Agreement will survive termination of this Agreement: Sections 1, 3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and any other provisions that, by their nature, are intended to survive. All rights to Digital Books acquired by customers will survive termination.

Bold highlights added by me... this basically states that they can do as they like and may or may not choose to give you reasons. As a set of T&Cs, it may very well stink but surely you read them before getting Amazon to publish your book... and you had the option not to proceed if you objected to these T&Cs...

1. Amazon did not publish my books. They were published through an independent publisher. Amazon agreed to provide them for sale in exchange for a percentage of the sales price. I have not self-published anything. At all.

2. As regards the rest of it -- so what? their T&C and requirements are so vague as to be meaningless. Hell, the BIBLE violates them, which means they are used solely to cover Amazon's said ass and therefore are worthless. And when the agreement is like that, it cannot be enforced except by whim.

3. And if you still think that matters, my books do NOT violate their T&Cs, even with them being that vague. They are not porn. There is no underage sex, pedophilia or bestiality in them. And they are not geared solely at satisfying one's prurient needs, so Amazon is in violation of its own T&Cs by dumping my books.

4. By doing this, they have damaged not only my work but my reputation. And kitty don't like that BS, so he's on the prowl to scowl and do a lot more than meowl in response.

5. You don't like it? Tough.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by jamthecat

While true in the strictest legal sense, it's not true morally, nor does it work within Amazon's publicly-stated philosophy that they want to have "EVERY book ever printed available." And that's an actual quote from Russ Grandinetti, the head of content for Kindle...and has, thus far, been shown to be an absolute lie. Even in the strictest legal sense of the word.

That's what they say. Amazon should put up or shut up.

[elcreative]

Then your independent publisher agreed to these terms and it doesn't matter how vague things are, basically the T&Cs say that they can do almost whatever they want, yup looks like ass-covering to me as well but the damn things must have been agreed to or the book would never have appeared... and it isn't illegal until a court determines the T&Cs are unfair practice... Amazon and other companies rely on likely complainants being financially unable to go to court or, if they do, be unable to stay the course.

Don't have a go at me, I'm on your side as to fairness etc of your treatment but whether your books violate their ideas or not doesn't matter when the T&Cs say they pull a book for any reason if they feel like it... life ain't fair... figure out a way round it, get your book published somewhere else, set up your own website, get their actions publicised somewhere that matters, where people may notice and support you... you need to get some serious muscle on your side so that Amazon may actually do something if the publicity gets bad enough... bitching on here may be satisfying but it isn't exactly CNN or the New York Times etc.

Originally Posted by jamthecat

1. Amazon did not publish my books. They were published through an independent publisher. Amazon agreed to provide them for sale in exchange for a percentage of the sales price. I have not self-published anything. At all.

2. As regards the rest of it -- so what? their T&C and requirements are so vague as to be meaningless. Hell, the BIBLE violates them, which means they are used solely to cover Amazon's said ass and therefore are worthless. And when the agreement is like that, it cannot be enforced except by whim.

3. And if you still think that matters, my books do NOT violate their T&Cs, even with them being that vague. They are not porn. There is no underage sex, pedophilia or bestiality in them. And they are not geared solely at satisfying one's prurient needs, so Amazon is in violation of its own T&Cs by dumping my books.

4. By doing this, they have damaged not only my work but my reputation. And kitty don't like that BS, so he's on the prowl to scowl and do a lot more than meowl in response.

5. You don't like it? Tough.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by jamthecat

1. Amazon did not publish my books. They were published through an independent publisher.

Correct, but irrelevant.

The terms of the agreement -- which I suppose are between your publisher and Amazon -- clearly state they are entitled to pull an item. As is any retailer, for almost any reason.

Originally Posted by jamthecat

2. As regards the rest of it -- so what? their T&C and requirements are so vague as to be meaningless.... When the agreement is like that, it cannot be enforced except by whim.

If you object to the terms, then don't sign the contract.

There is absolutely no obligation for a contract to be excruciatingly specific. You and/or your publisher made a free choice to accept their terms; there was no force or duress in effect.

If you, or your publisher, agrees to terms that you believe are vague or unfavorable, then that is your own parties' fault, and you have to live with the consequences.

Originally Posted by jamthecat

And if you still think that matters, my books do NOT violate their T&Cs....

Apparently, someone at Amazon does not agree with your characterization of your work. One person's "obvious" is another person's "maybe" is another person's "murky depths." C'est la guerre.

Originally Posted by jamthecat

By doing this, they have damaged not only my work but my reputation....

Yeah, no.

They pulled your book without fanfare and without comment. It was your choice to publicize the affair. They crimped your availability, but hardly cast any aspersions upon your character in the process.

Perhaps it is more accurate to say that you defamed yourself by publicizing the reason for the removal of your book?

[caleb72]

Hi JamTheCat. Good to see you in this thread.

A small question - is your ebook now available to Australia in any way? I'm not sure if your book was published with geographical restrictions or not, but I don't believe I can buy this book from Barnes & Noble or Borders.

Could I have bought it from Amazon when it was listed?

Also - for my own curiosity, can you confirm an assumption I've made reading your blog? Would you consider either of the books pulled erotica? I know you say they're not porno books, but I'm not sure if that actually means the same thing as erotica.

For the murder/mystery it looks like the rape mentioned is just a plot device to kick off the story.

I mention this because I'm surprised by how many responses have kept saying the books in question are "books about gay rape" which I don't feel is the case reading the summary of one of those books.

Not that my say-so means anything, but reading the summary of your books made me feel in no way that the books were sick, perverted or any similar words that seemed to make an appearence on occasion in this thread in some form or other.

Additionally, I don't see how the word "gay" should qualify the word "rape" in any way to make these books any more likely to be singled out.

However, although I think you've been a victim of a fairly clumsy attempt at removing offensive material from sale in reaction to the "how-to pedofile" saga, I do think they're working within their rights here.

I don't like considering where this "cleansing" might be heading and I sincerely hope the situation rights itself before too long and previously stripped books find their way back onto the virtual shelves of Amazon. In the meantime, can you try to make inroads into your previously enjoyed sales by publishing through other organisations like Smashwords? It's a bit of a consolation prize after Amazon, but at least you can find other avenues to get your works out there.

Regards
Caleb

[frquixote]

Amazon's hypocrisy in defending its posting of a book on pedophilia while at the same time censoring other books disgusts me and is a good reason not to buy from Amazon. The nearly 1000 posts on the thread addressing the pedophilia book and the 350+ posts on this thread speak volumes. Now it is time to tell them in terms they understand ... STOP ... BUYING ... FROM ... AMAZON.

[kindlekitten]

ain't gonna happen

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by eppythacher

Well I never realized the amount of books the US and Ireland have banned. To me the worst on the list was the Grapes of Wrath.

See also:
http://www.ala.org/ala/newspresscent...2010/index.cfm

http://www.comicsalliance.com/2010/0...ook-week-2010/

Banning the dictionary has to be the funniest one.

[kennyc]

Well, I think there may be some confusion about who is doing the banning. I don't think the U.S. Government is banning anything -- except if it is classified information. It may be that individual libraries or booksellers are "banning" particular books --- that's why I asked above for references to the claim. - https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...&postcount=379

[elcreative]

Wow, Amazon must be quaking in their boots... this forum is not exactly the most influential group in the world... even if everyone here used Amazon (and probably most don't) and all stopped at once, I doubt they'd even notice. We are a minority (and a small one at that), self selected by being on this forum unlike the majority of Amazon's customers happily reading on their Kindle...

As for the 1350+ posts on these two threads... well most of them are posted by a fairly small group of people hardly indicative of a massive army of outraged people going to terrorise Amazon with an effective boycott of their services...

Originally Posted by frquixote

Amazon's hypocrisy in defending its posting of a book on pedophilia while at the same time censoring other books disgusts me and is a good reason not to buy from Amazon. The nearly 1000 posts on the thread addressing the pedophilia book and the 350+ posts on this thread speak volumes. Now it is time to tell them in terms they understand ... STOP ... BUYING ... FROM ... AMAZON.

[otto117]

By removing titles that it finds offensive for any reason, Amazon is certainly not censoring. What it is doing, unwittingly, is contributing to a push by a very vocal "moral minority" to purge from the mainstream certain ideas expressed in text form. Because writers actually want to sell their books, writers will likely self-censor going forward in order to stay in the marketplace. More insidiously, the removal of the texts by Amazon helps set the stage for criminal obscenity charges to be filed in the most conservative jurisdictions in the United States (provided the book is still available in printed form).

The last time there was any serious government prosecution of the written word was over 35 years ago. It can happen again. Anyone who has read Phillip Greaves' poorly-written text will know that it's not obscene by a longshot. The two short scenes describing a minor engaged in sex with an adult (from the standpoint of the minor) -- told not for erotic arousal but for the purposes of illustrating Greaves' political point about 'paedophilia' -- is far less explicit than many many books in the marketplace (and still sold by Amazon). If Greaves is convicted, these other books are only a short step away.

On the same basis that Greaves is being attacked, for example, one could attack Piers Anthony's "Firefly," which has a section in the book explicitly describing a sexual relationship between an adult and a 5-year-old girl, told for the purposes of showing that 'paedophilia' isn't synonymous with sex abuse.

Can "Firefly" be prosecuted? Sure it can. So can any title by the Marquis de Sade, or Fanny Hill, for that matter, which contains sexual scenes of minors engaged in sex, including Fanny Hill herself at age 15. (Fanny Hill was last prosecuted in Boston in the 60s and was declared not obscene by the Supreme Court in Memoirs v. Massachusetts -- but under a pre-Miller obscenity standard).

Of course, Amazon is just a business. It is not, like many bookstores over the centuries, part of any intellectual community. What a pity.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by otto117

By removing titles that it finds offensive for any reason, Amazon is certainly not censoring. What it is doing, unwittingly, is contributing to a push by a very vocal "moral minority" to purge from the mainstream certain ideas expressed in text form. Because writers actually want to sell their books, writers will likely self-censor going forward in order to stay in the marketplace. More insidiously, the removal of the texts by Amazon helps set the stage for criminal obscenity charges to be filed in the most conservative jurisdictions in the United States (provided the book is still available in printed form).

The last time there was any serious government prosecution of the written word was over 35 years ago. It can happen again. Anyone who has read Phillip Greaves' poorly-written text will know that it's not obscene by a longshot. The two short scenes describing a minor engaged in sex with an adult (from the standpoint of the minor) -- told not for erotic arousal but for the purposes of illustrating Greaves' political point about 'paedophilia' -- is far less explicit than many many books in the marketplace (and still sold by Amazon). If Greaves is convicted, these other books are only a short step away.

On the same basis that Greaves is being attacked, for example, one could attack Piers Anthony's "Firefly," which has a section in the book explicitly describing a sex relationpship between an adult and a 5-year-old girl, told for the purposes of showing that 'paedophilia' isn't synonymous with sex abuse.

Can "Firefly" be prosecuted? Sure it can. So can any title by the Marquis de Sade, or Fanny Hill, for that matter, which contains sexual scenes of minors engaged in sex, including Fanny Hill herself at age 15. (Fanny Hill was last prosecuted in Boston in the 60s and was declared not obscene by the Supreme Court in Memoirs v. Massachusetts -- but under a pre-Miller obscenity standard).

Of course, Amazon is just a business. It is not, like many bookstores over the centuries, part of any intellectual community. What a pity.

I was mentioning something like this several pages ago - but I think your post says it better and actually uses examples.

Regards
Caleb

[tompe]

Originally Posted by otto117

By removing titles that it finds offensive for any reason, Amazon is certainly not censoring. What it is doing, unwittingly, is contributing to a push by a very vocal "moral minority" to purge from the mainstream certain ideas expressed in text form. Because writers actually want to sell their books, writers will likely self-censor going forward in order to stay in the marketplace. More insidiously, the removal of the texts by Amazon helps set the stage for criminal obscenity charges to be filed in the most conservative jurisdictions in the United States (provided the book is still available in printed form).

This together with Apple not allowing certain content in applications leading to newspapers that choose to use applications not being able to handle certain topics i a very worrying trend.