Makes me glad my reader is not connected

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by RobRittenhouse

That's up to Amazon. They are effectively the publisher.

In the dead tree world a publisher who negligently published a work that violated copyrights would be liable. I don't believe they would try to retrieve the books from the purchasers though. Nor do I think the purchasers have much liability (IANAL -- there was a comment from one earlier in this thread). I'm sure the publisher appreciates that Amazon did that but I doubt that the purchasers do.

Amazon might face a lawsuit from customers if they have, in fact, violated their EULA by removing the books.

Yes, exactly. But in this case, Amazon did not publish the book. They *distributed* it. Legally there is a world of difference between publishing and distributing.

Their liability ends with ceasing distribution.

Since they refunded the money to the customers, they are not liable for removing the content. As I've said, it's creepy and chilling that they did so, but legally it was by far the safest course. And as has been posted in another thread, it may have been the way their refund system operates. Frankly I didn't realize they offered refunds on e-books. That's unusual in my experience.

[carld]

Originally Posted by RobRittenhouse

That's up to Amazon. They are effectively the publisher.

No they are not. They more like a sales channel, fulfilling none of the traditional roles of a publisher.

Carl

[carld]

Originally Posted by netseeker

Who offers the distribution platform? Who gets paid directly by the customers? The publisher or Amazon?


Please prove your statement.

That's like saying the bookstore is reproducible for what the publisher does, no they aren't. They're responcible for pulling the offending book from the shelves, which is what Amazon did, only digital technology allowed Amazon to go a step further.

When you or I pirate a book and put it up on a torrent we know full well what we're doing is illegal beforehand. When someone pirates a work and puts it up on Amazon for sale Amazon has no idea what's going on until after the fact. Indeed Amazon has done nothing wrong whatsoever, they didn't infringe on the copyright, the pirate did. And as soon as this is discovered Amazon moves to correct things to the best our their ability, so no, it's not like you or I doing it at all.

Carl

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by carld

When you or I pirate a book and put it up on a torrent we know full well what we're doing is illegal beforehand. When someone pirates a work and puts it up on Amazon for sale Amazon has no idea what's going on until after the fact. Indeed Amazon has done nothing wrong whatsoever, they didn't infringe on the copyright, the pirate did. And as soon as this is discovered Amazon moves to correct things to the best our their ability, so no, it's not like you or I doing it at all.

Let's imagine that you have a lot of guests in your house and you allow them to use your computer. One of them copies a copyrighted file to your computer - right into the shared directory of your FileSharing-Application. Who is responsible for sharing that file one day later when the guests are gone? You or your guest? Both maybe? I would say both are responsible.

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by netseeker

Let's imagine that you have a lot of guests in your house and you allow them to use your computer. One of them copies a copyrighted file to your computer - right into the shared directory of your FileSharing-Application. Who is responsible for sharing that file one day later when the guests are gone? You or your guest? Both maybe? I would say both are responsible.

The law as I know it would disagree. The person who commits the act of illegally sharing a file is solely responsible for doing so.


If the book was illegally published as well, the illegal publisher is liable only for the act of illegal publishing (producing the book for sale or distribution without rights).

[tompe]

Originally Posted by doreenjoy

Yes, exactly. But in this case, Amazon did not publish the book. They *distributed* it. Legally there is a world of difference between publishing and distributing.

What is it that makes an entity a publisher? Amazon made the copies and then distributed them. Are they then partly a publisher because they took over the role of making copies from the publisher?

[wodin]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

It isn't hacking, and there were no breaking in of systems.

They have all the information of everyone's kindle on their servers. They want to get rid of something, they just mark a certain book as deleted, and then when your kindle phones home, it sees that it shouldnt have the book, and deletes it. No breaking in of systems. Also check your terms of service and end user license agreement. Shady but totally legal.

Accessing a computer and deleting data without the owner's knowledge or permission. I call that hacking!

What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

[carld]

Originally Posted by netseeker

Let's imagine that you have a lot of guests in your house and you allow them to use your computer. One of them copies a copyrighted file to your computer - right into the shared directory of your FileSharing-Application. Who is responsible for sharing that file one day later when the guests are gone? You or your guest? Both maybe? I would say both are responsible.

First, what are you doing with a file-sharing application that you allow your guests unsupervised access too? That's simply asking for something to happen and a long stretch for an analogy.

Other than being an idiot you've done nothing wrong, but it's still not analogous to Amazon's program. You can, and should, check what's in your file-sharing directory. Amazon cannot physically examine and read every book that they distribute for copyright violations, no book seller of any size can. It would be an enormous cost, not to mention how would you know if some random book is copyrighted? Amazon does not, nor does anyone else, have a database of every copyright work to check submissions against. Plus, if you're checking, you can't just check the title and author, you'd have to check every page of every book against everything ever copyrighted to be certain.

It's simply not feasible. Books sellers do however address copyright violations to the best of their ability when it's brought to their attention, which is what Amazon did.

[netseeker]

Carl, it's not necessary that we agree. We both wrote what we think that it could be possible/good or not/bad and we still disagree. Let's stop here...my answer would just contain things that i've already written in response to doreenjoy and i think it's just not worth the time to repeat arguments.

Anyway, i'm glad that no one can delete content from my device (Sony) remotely.

[RobRittenhouse]

Originally Posted by tompe

What is it that makes an entity a publisher? Amazon made the copies and then distributed them. Are they then partly a publisher because they took over the role of making copies from the publisher?

This is why I referred to them as effectively the publisher. It may be that they're simply the (digital analog to) the printer.

Makes me almost wish I were in legal studies. Lots of fun issues here. New frontiers.

[HansTWN]

for all those being happy that they do not have a Kindle: are you so sure that Sony (and other brands in similar ways) couldn't erase books from the Sony readers when you connect your readers to the computer via Sony's software?

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

for all those being happy that they do not have a Kindle: are you so sure that Sony (and other brands in similar ways) couldn't erase books from the Sony readers when you connect your readers to the computer via Sony's software?

Technically it would be possible in theory but it would require that we all use Sonys software, what we don't have to. Btw. we are not happy that we don't have a Kindle (it's a great device), we are just happy that (currently) no one is able to delete content from our devices.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by netseeker

Technically it would be possible in theory but it would require that we all use Sonys software, what we don't have to. Btw. we are not happy that we don't have a Kindle (it's a great device), we are just happy that (currently) no one is able to delete content from our devices.

Of course, it wouldn't be possible if you use Calibre or use the reader as a USB hard disk. Just wanted to point out that the same thing could happen to some people, and those being paranoid about it should take some precautions.

[doreenjoy]

A Publisher negotiates with the copyright holder (usually the author of a work) for the right to sell a work for a set period of time. The publisher adds value through editing, line editing, proofreading, adding cover art, and/or typesetting the work. This arrangement is between the copyright holder and the publisher.

The publisher has distributon agreements with selected vendors. The distributors provide payment to the publisher for copies sold, and the publisher then pays the copyright holder from whom the work was licensed. The contracts for this service are between the publisher and the distributor.

There can also be retail vendors, who accept books from the distributor (usually on consignment) and sell them direct to customers. Proceeds from those sales are reported to the distributor. The contracts in this area are betwen the vendor (e.g. Borders) and the distributor (e.g. Ingrams). Generally money is exchanged between vendor and distributor, between distributor and publisher, and between publisher and author.

[daesdaemar]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I honestly don't think you have a leg to stand on here.

Someone uploaded material which they did not have the right to distribute. Amazon removed that specific file from the machines which their database told them that it had been sent to, and refunded the customers' money in full. Amazon routines remove content from Kindles - this is well-known. Eg, they remove all subscription content that's older than a certain age.

What's the problem? Nobody's suffered any financial loss. If you want to "blame" someone, blame the people who uploaded the illegal content originally.

If you buy a pirated book at Borders, they do not have the right to enter your home to take it back. You don't rent a Kindle from Amazon, you buy it. It is your personal property. In the USA, at least, there are generally very strong personal property rights. I would be surprised if this incident doesn't generate yet another class-action suit against Amazon that they will have to settle since I don't believe they would have any chance of defending.