Hacks Kindle Touch - disable special offers & change screensaver

[volwrath]

It is not *complete* nonsense as he also mentions modifying the kindle and if you don't condone the removing of the screensavers because it violates the TOS, then you shouldnt condone jailbreaking and the corresponding mods.

He is pushing it saying sideloading content is the same however

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by volwrath

It is not *complete* nonsense as he also mentions modifying the kindle and if you don't condone the removing of the screensavers because it violates the TOS, then you shouldnt condone jailbreaking and the corresponding mods.

He is pushing it saying sideloading content is the same however

Jailbreaking is absolutely a violation of the ToS, yes. But loading your own content most assuredly is not.

[haroldgh]

Guys, they said their policy is that they discourage it, not that they'll stop people from talking about it on the forums by moderating posts, banning people, etc. I don't see why that's so controversial. Their opinion is perfectly valid.

Personally, I haven't bothered to block ads. I never turn wifi on, so I never see them anyway.

[dmcounts]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Jailbreaking is absolutely a violation of the ToS, yes. But loading your own content most assuredly is not.

Technically, loading any content that was not purchased from the Kindle Store or transferred through the Personal Documents is a violation of the ToS.

For the purposes of this Agreement:

"Content Provider" means the party offering Digital Content in the Kindle Store, which may be us or a third party; however, for Digital Content designated as active content in the Kindle Store, "Content Provider" means the publisher of the Digital Content.

"Digital Content" means digitized electronic content obtained through the Kindle Store, such as books, newspapers, magazines, journals, blogs, RSS feeds, games, and other static and interactive electronic content.

"Kindle" means our portable electronic reading device.

Amazon did provide a way to load the digital content in the case of a person not having wireless access:

If you are outside of range of a Wi-Fi network, or unable to connect to a protected Wi-Fi network, you can still download your Kindle content purchased from Amazon.com to your computer and transfer it via USB to your Kindle.

I really don't think that is even in question as far as the legal implications of the ToS.

What we are concerned about is the moral implications and whether a person has a serious character defect if he violates the ToS.

Let us explore that a bit shall we?

Amazon has provided us with a mobile digital reader to utilize digital content purchased through their Kindle Store. I doubt they make much profit on the sale of the readers but do indeed profit when digital content is purchased through their Kindle Store.

When the users download content from somewhere other than Amazon they lose that sale.

An example is the ebook The Door with Seven Locks by Edgar Wallace.

Here it is on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Door-Seven-Loc...5458096&sr=8-2

Notice the price is $3.99.

But here we can download it for free:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72147

(Thank you HarryT for that great book)

Everyone who downloads that ebook and sideloads it on their device costs Amazon a sale of $3.99 and has violated the ToS.

Amazon says just because they do not insist on strict compliance with the ToS does not negate it or keep them from enforcing it in the future.

We should continue to enjoy our Kindles and quit criticizing each other for enjoying theirs even when they push the envelope of the ToS.

Let Amazon be the enforcer of their ToS agreements.



don

[HarryT]

Don,

This is utter nonsense. Nowhere in the ToS is there a prohibition against loading your own content. I would suggest that you ask Amazon if you're unclear on that point. While you're talking to them, you may wish to also ask them if it is permissible to remove the ads from the KSO.

But your or my personal feelings on the subject of ad removal are irrelevant. The fact is that, as stated, MR very strongly disapproves of this practice and will do our utmost to discourage it.

[dmcounts]

I will continue to not question the characters of others who ask questions about what they can do with their devices even when it seems they may be violating the Terms of Service Agreement they have with Amazon.

I will continue to allow that to be a private issue between them and Amazon.


don

[DiapDealer]

I will continue to allow that to be a private issue between them and Amazon.

It can only be considered private if they don't announce it on the internet. At that point it becomes fair game to be scrutinized and judged.

People can't have it both ways. You don't get to air your business on the internet and then expect people on the internet to "mind their own business." If you want privacy, then BE private.

[dmcounts]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

It can only be considered private if they don't announce it on the internet. At that point it becomes fair game to be scrutinized and judged.

People can't have it both ways. You don't get to air your business on the internet and then expect people on the internet to "mind their own business." If you want privacy, then BE private.

I will leave the judgmental declarations of a person's character to you.

If I can help a new person I will. If I decide I don't agree with what they want to do I will simply go on to the next thread and keep my opinion to myself.


don

[DiapDealer]

You're my hero.

[dmcounts]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You're my hero.

I am not a hero but I sure don't want to be the one who drives a new kindle owner away from the site for asking a question that he doesn't suspect will generate such a large amount of animosity directed at him questioning his character for having asked it.


don

[Morpheus Phreak]

When you start a topic asking how you can avoid paying for something and how to violate a legal contract you SHOULD expect some upset people.

I mean seriously...why wouldn't someone be upset when someone asks how to commit a crime?

[volwrath]

Originally Posted by Morpheus Phreak

I mean seriously...why wouldn't someone be upset when someone asks how to commit a crime?

This *IS* complete nonsense. Perhaps it is unethical, and it is certainly against the TOS, but it is not a criminal offense, at least not in the US. It is a civil offense at best.

[Morpheus Phreak]

Originally Posted by volwrath

This *IS* complete nonsense. Perhaps it is unethical, and it is certainly against the TOS, but it is not a criminal offense, at least not in the US. It is a civil offense at best.

It's not?

"In criminal law, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain..."

When you agree to buy the device WITH Special Offers for a lower price, and then remove them by circumventing their ability to be displayed you ARE committing a criminal act...fraud.

[dmcounts]

Originally Posted by Morpheus Phreak

It's not?

"In criminal law, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain..."

When you agree to buy the device WITH Special Offers for a lower price, and then remove them by circumventing their ability to be displayed you ARE committing a criminal act...fraud.

No sir it is not.

At the worst it is a breach of contract.

The only parties that would have standing in any litigation concerning it would be one of the signatories to that contract.

Why is it you want so much to involve the federal or state governments in private agreements between us and Amazon?

Oh, and by the way, according to the ToS agreement you agreed to when you began using the kindle neither you nor Amazon are allowed to pursue any claim of breach of agreement in any court either civil or criminal.

You and Amazon agreed any disputes will be decided by an arbitrator and only on an individual basis one case at a time.






don