Makes me glad my reader is not connected

[Andybaby]

Originally Posted by Sonist

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.)

true, but for anyone who was hurt by this, they did sign the contract, and this was overblown BS from the start.

I don't get what all the Hubub was about especially after the details that it was infringing works that were removed not a "request from the publisher" which implied something else.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

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.

You were faster than I was. I edited my post, after I reread Alfy's post and thought I misunderstood him

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Sonist

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.)

My argument is about copyright at all.

What I find funny is people whinging about Amazon doing to them essentially what they feel they have the right to do to an author.

That is........

Something that may or may not be legal but is certainly infringing upon the rights of the other party.

Cheers,
PKFFW
P.S: Please note that I am not saying all people whinging are doing this, only those that are also advocating copyright infringement as being ok.

[netseeker]

"non-sense", "nutty" or "hilarious" opinions and complaints, "people who don't get it", "whinging", ...

Please don't forget that this is MobileRead where people discuss politely and treat each other with respect - even if they disagree on a certain topic.

Michael

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by netseeker

"non-sense", "nutty" or "hilarious" opinions and complaints, "people who don't get it", "whinging", ...

Please don't forget that this is MobileRead where people discuss politely and treat each other with respect - even if they disagree on a certain topic.

Michael

The ability to make one laugh is a quality I respect very much.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[igorsk]

Originally Posted by ahi

Personally, I am in fact worried that the Sony EBook Library (or whatever it's called) software phones home and reports, whether in a personally identifying manner or only statistically, about the contents of my device and my usage habits.

You say that as if it's a fact. Do you have any evidence? From my investigations, the information eBook Library sends to Sony servers only relates to the books you buy in their shop. If you add any extra files to the library or your Reader, Sony doesn't know about them.

[MaggieScratch]

This is an unfortunate situation and I would be angry if I were one of those affected. However, looking at it from a pragmatic point of view, I can understand why Amazon deleted the files from users' Kindles: because they can. If they were Fictionwise or BoB, just selling books and not having that two-way access to their users' devices, they could just remove the books from sale and be done with it. But since they DO have access to their users' devices, to fully indemnify themselves they probably felt it necessary to remove the book from the users' devices as well and refund the purchase price. It will look better for them if there is litigation; they can say they took every action they were capable of to respect the copyright holder's rights. They were being risk-averse.*

That being said, I don't think it's a "huge blow" to the Kindle. This situation affected a relatively small group of users. The majority will continue to enjoy the ease of use of Whispernet and never even think about it. If they deleted, say, The Da Vinci Code or some other popular bestseller, there would be an uproar, I dare say.

*Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I just make websites for them.

[bob315]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

have you heard of any case where Amazon removed legal content purchased from the Kindle Store? No. And that's because Amazon doesn't do that.

Well, they do, on occasion. I routinely send in lists of typos in Kindle books. Often they just apologize, but once...

Thank you for writing to us about the difficulty you had recently
reading Fleet of Worlds on your Kindle. I've looked at the item
myself, and it appears that there is a problem with that file. I
apologize for the inconvenience this has caused.

To help remedy the problem, I've issued a full refund for Fleet of
Worlds in the amount of $9.99. The refund will be applied to the
payment method used for the original purchase and should be completed
within the next 2 to 3 business days. The item will also be removed
from Your Media Library and your Kindle.

The removal was their decision, not mine. This all happened after I had finished reading the book, so I was not particularly upset.

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by bob315

Well, they do, on occasion. I routinely send in lists of typos in Kindle books. Often they just apologize, but once...

Thank you for writing to us about the difficulty you had recently
reading Fleet of Worlds on your Kindle. I've looked at the item
myself, and it appears that there is a problem with that file. I
apologize for the inconvenience this has caused.

To help remedy the problem, I've issued a full refund for Fleet of
Worlds in the amount of $9.99. The refund will be applied to the
payment method used for the original purchase and should be completed
within the next 2 to 3 business days. The item will also be removed
from Your Media Library and your Kindle.

The removal was their decision, not mine. This all happened after I had finished reading the book, so I was not particularly upset.

What if you wanted to read it again at a later date? I would have responded with "No, Do not remove it. I never asked you to remove it. I simply informed you of some errors that could be remedied. If I ask for a refund/return, then fine. But I did not."

Or something similar. Yes, I take books very seriously. I have many that I love to reread. I'm not the kind of person who reads a book once and then never again.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

What if you wanted to read it again at a later date? I would have responded with "No, Do not remove it. I never asked you to remove it. I simply informed you of some errors that could be remedied. If I ask for a refund/return, then fine. But I did not."

Or something similar. Yes, I take books very seriously. I have many that I love to reread. I'm not the kind of person who reads a book once and then never again.

Exactly. I would have been very upset by them just removing the book. And if they give me a new version of the book I want to keept the old so I can see if they fixed things or not or introduced new errors. Also my annotations will be relative to one edition of the book.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

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

Certainly... after being ordered to by a court of law.

A store I've purchased from doesn't have the right to demand the return of the purchased goods. Not even if they offer me a refund.

1984 is still available at Amazon... for $10. It looks an awful lot like, "oops, we sold you the cheap version and we weren't authorized. Here, have your dollar back; if you want to read this book, you need to pay for the upgraded version."

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

... What I find funny is people whinging about Amazon doing to them essentially what they feel they have the right to do to an author.

That is........

Something that may or may not be legal but is certainly infringing upon the rights of the other party.
...

Nope. These "people" didn't do anything "bad" to the author, they paid money and received the book file in exchange.

My whole point is, that there are ample legal remedies for the copyright holder to be made whole.

Instead, Amazon took a "shortcut" and reached into such people's Kindles, and removed their legally obtained files. The legality of this action is at least dubious, the EULA notwithstanding (and I don't even know what it says on the subject, just like 99.999% of those who purchased a Kindle.)

Again, at least in the US, there are well-established legal procedures for copyright holders to defend their rights, and to be compensated if a court decides so. Do you understand this?

Or, do you have a problem with these established practices, and believe that large corporations have a better way of dispensing "justice," even if extralegal?

[carld]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Certainly... after being ordered to by a court of law.

A store I've purchased from doesn't have the right to demand the return of the purchased goods. Not even if they offer me a refund.

1984 is still available at Amazon... for $10. It looks an awful lot like, "oops, we sold you the cheap version and we weren't authorized. Here, have your dollar back; if you want to read this book, you need to pay for the upgraded version."

I don't think it looks like that at all. I think it looks exactly like it's been portrayed, illegal upload, book removed, money refunded.

[kacir]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

What if you wanted to read it again at a later date? I would have responded with "No, Do not remove it. I never asked you to remove it. I simply informed you of some errors that could be remedied. If I ask for a refund/return, then fine. But I did not."

Think about it. Logically.
Absolutely no harm was done.

If Bob 315 is indeed dissatisfied with the book to the point he does not want it, he keeps the money.

If he wants the book despite the errors, he can purchase it again any time he wants. There is even chance that when he waits a little bit the newly purchased book will be the corrected one.

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by kacir

Think about it. Logically.
Absolutely no harm was done.

If Bob 315 is indeed dissatisfied with the book to the point he does not want it, he keeps the money.

If he wants the book despite the errors, he can purchase it again any time he wants. There is even chance that when he waits a little bit the newly purchased book will be the corrected one.

But logic dictates that I should be asked whether or not I would like a refund. It's also something called Consideration.

I would rather keep my copy UNTIL a new one comes out. Taking it away, refunding my money, and letting me RE-purchase if I wasnt to is very inconsiderate if I actually had to go thru the purchasing procedure again.

I would send a very stiff letter (as Hugh Laurie repeatedly states..."And I shall post it, too")