All Romance eBooks / OmniLit to close on 12/31/16

[ScalyFreak]

I am becoming more and more confused about how exactly customers of ARe who have lost books, managed and read the books they bought from the site.

If a person had an account with ARe, and purchased from the website via their computer, the default option was to download one copy of the book in an available format. mostly ePub. That one ePub copy landed in their default download folder, and the person would then use a program of their choice to manage it along with their other books (in my case I use Calibre).

The ARe app became an option late in the site's life cycle. If someone at that point started to exclusively use the app then, yes, they have probably lost those books. But any books they downloaded and read before they started using the app should still be on their computers, since that used to be the only way to get them onto an eReader. In fact, anyone who wanted to read their ARe books on a device that wasn't a smartphone or a tablet with the app on (or their computer...), would have needed to follow the method I described, and then side-loaded the ePub files to their eReader using either Calibre or a similar software.

That user would only have been able to lose the ARe books they bought but never downloaded, or the books they bought and never transferred outside the site's exclusive app. If that's the majority of their library that is too bad, but now we're back at the point of the discussion where I politely suggest that person needs to educate themselves just a bit better on how file storage and back-ups work and how to use them.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Right, but that's your personal opinion, whereas the post above was suggesting legal action (those that lost access to their books should file a complaint with Florida's Attorney General).

Morally, maybe both sides are at fault. I sure feel for the readers that lost access due to the sudden closure and am not as quick as you to blame them for not backing up their books.

But regardless of either of our opinions, I doubt the readers who lost their books have a legal leg to stand on.

But is it something that you can take legal action about? It's not the shop's fault you didn't download to the computer. I think you'd lose the case if it even got that far.

Personally, I don't use store apps for reading. Because of that, I have to download in order to get the books.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Probably true. It's just so sad. Still maybe if enough complaints are made the AG would take action. It's worth a try.

We need to change this. We need to change the law about owning ebooks if anything this is a prime example why.

Sent from my XT1528

Why would they need to take action? If you read any site they usually tell you to down load your books because they won't guarantee that they will always be there.

As they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law. If you choose not to educate yourself as to what you can, can't should, shouldn't do with your books most especially with having them in YOUR possession then you deserve whatever you get.

This isn't just about ebooks, it's about any kind of media that is downloadable. And it has been an issue for YEARS. If you do it for your music, WTH wouldn't you do it for your books.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

As they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law. If you choose not to educate yourself as to what you can, can't should, shouldn't do with your books most especially with having them in YOUR possession then you deserve whatever you get.

This isn't just about ebooks, it's about any kind of media that is downloadable. And it has been an issue for YEARS. If you do it for your music, WTH wouldn't you do it for your books.

This is exactly what I have been trying to say throughout this thread. Yes, it's tragic that you lost your books. Except you never did anything to actually make them yours, so it shouldn't surprise you. Welcome to the mid-1990s.

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

Why would they need to take action? If you read any site they usually tell you to down load your books because they won't guarantee that they will always be there.

As they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law. If you choose not to educate yourself as to what you can, can't should, shouldn't do with your books most especially with having them in YOUR possession then you deserve whatever you get.

This isn't just about ebooks, it's about any kind of media that is downloadable. And it has been an issue for YEARS. If you do it for your music, WTH wouldn't you do it for your books.

Because you don't own those files according to law. Then there are legalities of removing DRM especially in the U.S. but that's for another thread. You are paying full price for access. For access that maybe revoked. What happens when ADE becomes obsolete like LIT Microsoft Reader did? How are they supposed to read those books then? Laws need to be changed.

Sent from my Nexus 7

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Because you don't own those files according to law.

That's typically the case with music as well, but people still do it.

Let's assume someone downloads a DRM-free file to their computer, and the licensing terms change later on (assuming the original license terms allow for that), and remove that as an option. How do you enforce the new terms with all the users who have already downloaded a file and uploaded it to a number of devices? Why would you even bother to spend the time and effort to try?

DRM-free means I can use it as I see fit as long as I am the only one using it. That sounds a lot like exclusive ownership to me. In fact, licensing terms can call it what they want, but the practical reality is the same as if I own the file. Everything else, is semantics.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

That's typically the case with music as well, but people still do it.

Let's assume someone downloads a DRM-free file to their computer, and the licensing terms change later on (assuming the original license terms allow for that), and remove that as an option. How do you enforce the new terms with all the users who have already downloaded a file and uploaded it to a number of devices? Why would you even bother to spend the time and effort to try?

DRM-free means I can use it as I see fit as long as I am the only one using it. That sounds a lot like exclusive ownership to me. In fact, licensing terms can call it what they want, but the practical reality is the same as if I own the file. Everything else, is semantics.

BINGO!

Once it is on your computer YOU OWN IT! If you are paranoid enough to think someone is going to come check your pc for copyright material, you have bigger problems then some lost ebooks.

And quite frankly, I don't give a rats ass about what the supposed law says, I bought it, I own it. I'm not selling it, giving it away, or uploading it for the masses. It is mine to keep forever. Don't make laws that you have absolutely NO WAY to enforce.

People were copying record albums on to tapes for years, and nobody said boo. It only became a big deal once the digital age arrived.

But again, the plain fact of the matter is once it is in your possession, nobody including the media companies are going to come after you to see what you have on your pc. They have bigger things to worry about.

So long as you are using it for your benefit and aren't uploading it all over the world, you have nothing to worry about.

It's all about utilizing common sense, which a great many people seem to lack.

[Blossom]

Oh and how do feel about KFX? How are people suppose to download those type books? The new Kindle for PC just updated. No longer compatible with "The Tools" We are moving toward non compatible files and streaming books. Soon we all may feel the sting these individuals felt. Paperbacks are looking better and better.

Sent from my Nexus 7

[jackie_w]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

People were copying record albums on to tapes for years, and nobody said boo.

Actually they did try to say 'boo', at least here in the UK in the 1980s. I don't remember taking much notice, though. I always transferred my LPs to cassette as soon as I bought them.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

People were copying record albums on to tapes for years, and nobody said boo. It only became a big deal once the digital age arrived.

I remember sitting by the radio, waiting for my favorite song to come on, with the finger poised on the Rec button of my radio-cassette deck. And no one cared abut that, despite the frantic rage that cassette tapes were going to kill the music industry.

I have a theory that the music industry would prefer that we went back to the stone age where live performances was the only entertainment medium available, for the simple reason that they are narrow-minded and incapable of creative vision, and because of that, they are the very last ones to adopt emerging technologies, which in turn means they miss the proverbial buss every single time.

There is no way they would have had a problem with Napster if they had thought of it first. And the fact they didn't, is why they want it to remain illegal. So no, I can't send you the album of this awesome new artist I think you wold love from my computer to yours, because that's against the law. I will just have to let you borrow it, like we did back in the 90s

Like we still do with books.

Which begs the question, why is it okay for me to lend you my printed copy of A Song of fire and Ice, but not the eBook? (And don't tell me it is because the paperback is going to be returned, we all know once you lend out a book you never get it back. ) this double standard makes it even more confusing and frustrating.

Originally Posted by cfrizz

It's all about utilizing common sense, which a great many people seem to lack.

Yeah, I never could figure out why it's referred to as common sense, when it's anything but.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

People were copying record albums on to tapes for years, and nobody said boo. It only became a big deal once the digital age arrived.

That's not true. It was discussed a lot and isn't hard to find details about it. "Home Taping Is Killing Music" was a campaign in the UK. And, from memory, some countries had a "copy tax" included in the cost of cassettes or recording equipment to pay for the piracy. But, the big thing is that most of the recording was largely done for personal use. I recorded most of my LPs so that I could play them in the car. These were never put in a place that others could copy.

The big thing with the digital age is how much easier it is, and the fact that copies of copies don't degrade.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Oh and how do feel about KFX? How are people suppose to download those type books?

Honestly? Probably illegally, unless they are willing to risk losing them. Not exactly user-friendly.

And to answer your first question, this is how I feel about KFX, for reasons implied by my answer to your second question: (Not entirely an accurate representation, but there was no vomiting smiley available.)

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Honestly? Probably illegally, unless they are willing to risk losing them. Not exactly user-friendly.

And to answer your first question, this is how I feel about KFX, for reasons implied by my answer to your second question: (Not entirely an accurate representation, but there was no vomiting smiley available.)

I know it's scary to think what is coming ahead. The cloud is taking over and there is little we can do.

Sent from my Nexus 7

[ScalyFreak]

Nah, not scary. Aggravating.

There will always be a way around it for those who really want one. DVDs were supposed to be unhackable. Then Bluray was unhackable. Then Amazon's DRM was unhackable. The list goes on.

The vast majority of DRM-breakers don't want to screw over the file creator and spread the files for free. We just want to use the book/song/movie/game we just paid for as we want to use it, without being constrained by how the copyright holder thinks we should use it. Especially since most copy-right holders seem to be luddites who own a smartphone only because their employer forced them to, and the only app they ever use is the text messaging. The thought of multiple tablets, or more than one computer per household, just does not exist in their world.

Why should they be allowed to dictate how I read my book, once I've paid for the right to read it? Legislation in this area was outdated before Napster died, and hasn't changed since. That's a huge part of the problem.

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Why should they be allowed to dictate how I read my book, once I've paid for the right to read it? Legislation in this area was outdated before Napster died, and hasn't changed since. That's a huge part of the problem.

Exactly. We need new laws to protect our rights as a consumer.

From what I hear no one has broken the DRM on KFX. I've been told it can't be done. We may have reached the end once that is the only format. To say there is always a way is good optimism but we may reached a standstill in the future if things keeping going in this direction.

Sent from my Nexus 7