Amazon Remotely Deletes Legitimately Purchased Books From Thousands Of Kindles

@BettinaMcCabe: Wonder what temperature a Kindle burns at.

Jake712

I don't care what their rationale is, if they are going to keep such control over the device and it's contents, then they should be paying the user, not the other way around.

I'd like to buy some sort of e-book reader, but it would have to be hackable, support non-drm formats such as PDF and even plain text, which I can load/sync with my PC - no live internet connection neccessary. The Kindle does not even come close.

taodude

@KerriGabs: Explain to me exactly how an unregulated, free-market capitalist enterprise = socialism, please.

Edit: "replied to" does not necessarily = approved of, either.

How can this action by Amazon even be considered remotely legal?

hemo_jr

@nutbastard: +1. You've had a lot of awesome comments, but this one earns you the heart click.

psychiccheese

@nutbastard: bahahaha

I still never have seen the point in the Kindle $500(give or take) to read a digital copy of a book I can buy for less...this is just the nail in the coffin for me.

tricky1

GEORGE: Yes, I, uh, I need to return this book.

CASHIER: (Puts the book's code into the computer) I'm sorry, we can't take this book back.

GEORGE: Why not?

CASHIER: It's been flagged.

GEORGE: (Confused) Flagged?

CASHIER: It's been in the bathroom.

GEORGE: It says that on the computer?

CASHIER: Please take it home. We don't want it near the other books.

GEORGE: (Outraged. Leaving) Well, you just lost a lot of business! Because I love to read!

nutbastard

For now, I stick to actual, physical books. Tomorrow I may even go to a book store. Have to finish my Stephen King book first though.

Identity: The Sequel.

If the Kindle wasn't a failure yet, this news plus the rumored Apple tablet certainly will kill this abomination.

Seriously people do you all think digitally downloaded content is the wave of the future? I've never heard a story where the UPS guy comes to someone's house to ask for a book back.

soulfinger

I'm pissed. I was reading 1984 for summer homework. I was about 20% in with a plethora of notes and annotations. All things I needed to complete my homework.

Now it's all gone. This is not right or fair or equal.

They didn't just take a book back, they stole my work.

You know, I understand the publisher pulling the book for some reason from the store, but you can't take it from MY KINDLE. When a book goes out of print, they don't gather all the books currently in circulation and take them back. That's bullshit.

I've already written e-mails to amazon, and unless this is dealt with in a timely manner and to my liking - I will never recommend a Kindle to anyone.

Apple doesn't take back songs I purchased.
Neither should Kindle. They are in the wrong. They should have just taken it from the store.

NeroVeto

I can't decide if this is worse than a book burning...

@nutbastard:

I giggled.

I own both a kindle 1 and a kindle 2, and have never purchased a DRM book through amazon. also never turn the stupid radios on. I get all my reading material from fictionwise (non-DRM versions or "multi format") or webscriptions.net - Baen books - they don't DRM a damn thing there.

If amazon doesn't sell DRM music, why sell DRM books? answer: book publishers are idiots. not necessarily amazon.

Anyone else mention that 1984 came pre-loaded on the first sony reader?

METAMETAMETAMETAmeta?

doofusgumby

This is a prefect example of "fairplay"! Doubleplusgood!!!

Noobs-R-Us

@puhsitch: Unfortunately, as much as it would make sense to rent out e-readers to students and sell them their textbooks at $15 a pop, the textbook manufacturers will never let it happen. They'd lose too much money.

kylenalepa

They should not have a say so of deleting things you have already bought. I would sue amazon for theft, If I break in a store and take items and leave money on the counter, did I not still break the law??

That made me laugh and shudder at the same time. Could they have picked a better book to do this to? And yes, this means I, too, will not get a Kindle. Ever. Wasn't there a single Kindle not connected to the Internet? There must be a way around this...oh wait, TPB (for now).

@CarynGalolahere:

Wait wait wait –a book wherein one of THE main themes is censorship is in effect censored by amazon, and you want to censor the article to show the kids how censorship is evil?

I understand your position but the meta-ness of this just went up by another order of magnitude.

nutbastard

The only way this could be more ominous and creepy is if they deleted all the copies of 1984 - and replaced em with Catcher In The Rye

awesome graphic, BTW.

nutbastard

Just for you Kindle owners... here you go!

Freely distributable from Project Gutenberg Australia (any author who died before 1955):

Animal Farm:
http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100011.txt

1984:
http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt

Many of Orwell's other works:
http://gutenberg.net.au/plusfifty-n-z.html

Jordan Lund

"Once I buy a book from Barnes & Noble, I never have to worry about them breaking into my house and taking it back, leaving me a pile of singles on my nightstand."

Oh come on, you couldn't come up with a one paragraph summary without plagiarizing the source article? Or did you think changing 'check' to 'pile of singles' made it your original thought.

yeti

@weatherman: Users who buy from Amazon are purchasing in good faith from a retailer that's widely accepted as legitimate. Therefore, AMAZON should be shouldering the burden of this mistake, not Kindle users. I'd love to see a class action lawsuit as a result of this. I'm absolutely infuriated. We need to nip this kind of thing in the bud *right now*, and send a signal to other DRM-happy companies that this kind of thing is not acceptable.

duerra

@dirtybacon:
Have you checked your root kit lately?

Bill B.

stlbud

@TristanGlabrio: I'm sorry, but if an illegitimate copy of a book got onto Amazon's marketplace, that's THEIR problem, not mine. If they sold it to me through their store and I bought it legitimately, in good faith, it should be mine, DRM be damned. The publisher should be taking this up with Amazon and their policies, and it should have no effect on me.

duerra

@TheWerewolf - Causing headlines!: +1 1984 reference.

So. Let's add up the Kindle's news this month:

1) they dropped the price to a still-high and not newbie-friendly point
2) shitty customer service in not replacing the case when their own branded cover caused damage (until the class action suit)
3) deleting someone's purchased content without express permission or communication

I'm an early adopter in almost every class of gadget out there and I'm not getting this for a long time. They just don't have their act together as a hardware manufacturer and the needs of that business.

They've raised the ebook rations from 192 books a month to 168 books a month!!!

@RainyDayInterns: legally speaking, if the seller did not legitimately own the item in the first place, then no, the purchaser is not always the owner. It's an open question that relies on whether or not the buyer did so in "good faith" and for "fair value." In this case I one could argue both ways whether fair value was paid for the item.

If the copy of the material was uploaded by someone other than the copyright holder, which many are presuming is the case here, then Amazon probably had an obligation to remove the book from the store and disgorge any money made from it. But until there's an official explanation from Amazon about what happened, all we're going on is the the initial reports and limited analysis of David Pogue.

@Purple Monkey Dishwasher:

Funny thing about Asimov & "I, Robot"...Not ONCE do any of his robots in the short stories listed in said book try to attack humans. Rather, they are all being shown to SAVE humans, to protect them...The movie was exactly the opposite of what Asimov kept trying to tell people: Humans, not robots, are killers. Robots won't attack and go crazy unless a human tells it to do so, as its programming only follows logical steps.

And it seems that Amazon is being robotic as well and doing what its controllers want...Who's the publisher of the aforementioned books? I want to boycott!

Sprzout

Doubleplusbad, Amazon

dtran09

@Justinpaulson: Then the publisher has to give the money back.

If I walk out of best buy with an hkdvd that I got for really cheap, but had no idea why it was cheaper, can I at a later date be forced to return it for the price I paid? How long of a delay (24 hours, 2 years later)? It was advertised in the store for a price, I bought it, then left. I can't rebuy the official version for the "sale" price I originally found it for. I was mislead (by mistake or overt) into buying that at best buy, perhaps buying other things (baiting), too.

Now, instead of requesting or forcing it back, imagine you wake up and some of your stuff is just missing, but you have a credit from amazon for $13.50 on your visa.

Would you really be happy at this situation? Especially after buying a proprietary Amazon ebook reader for $300-400?

I don't own either a kindle, or purchased any digital content from amzon; and certainly won't now. But I have xbox live, steam, and an iPhone. You probably own at least some digital drm that you trust, right?

Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

Tattertotter

@ Creative Commons License, which means you can share and/or adapt it for non-commercial purposes, so long as you attribute the source. Hope that helps.

Its a damn shame that Amazon can't seem to get copyright issues sorted out with the Kindle. First it was the Text-to-Voice issue and now this kind of thing.

They did get audio right with the MP3 sales (or at least as close to right as anyone is getting nowadays)...so it leaves you wondering why they couldn't leverage more weight against publishing companies when it came to the Kindle.

@TristanGlabrio:
It may still be available from a major publisher, but the publisher who's copy people had purchased (Mobisoft or MobiReference or something similar) did decide to pull a once-legitimate copy from electronic circulation, so people who had purchased those copies suffered.

@NinjaTaco: I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want someone to come in to my house, take one of my games or dvds, and simply offer me exactly what I paid for it (and probably couldn't rebuy it for).

I was going to use it later. Or maybe I was using it right now?

Or maybe I'm completely done using it, and would give it back if they *asked*.

@mullingitover: The only thing that's worse than Amazon deleting books off my Kindle are the incongruous comments people feel the need to make to try and explain a simple concept.

WTF! Cracks Kindle over knee... Oh Amazon you owe me a new screen bastiches!

bonedog73

@TristanGlabrio: The bigger problem is that Amazon is able to forcibly remove something they sold you. You wouldn't be OK with Amazon breaking into your house and stealing your books, and leaving the refund on your kitchen table would you? This is along the same lines to some people. Yes I'm aware that you have a license, and that your usage contract with Amazon allows them to forcibly remove your purchase and refund you. However, that's not how people think when it comes to their purchases. This is a black eye for the whole Kindle business model.

mullingitover

Hey Giz, they were bootlegs. Just like they have done before with bootlegged copies.

The real issue here is...Why isn't Amazon checking these things out before offering them up on the store in the first place!? I think the problem is that some of these books are public domain in a number of countries...just not the US.

@TristanGlabrio: Thank you for that explanation. Just when I was getting caught up in all the anti-Amazon hype, you gave a rational explanation that apparently nobody is listening to because nobody cares. We'd all just rather hate Amazon than admit that if someone uploads a book for which they do not have the rights, they should not profit from it.

This is a case where the copyright laws are confusing - in some countries, Orwell's works are in the public domain. In the US, they are not. So anyone uploading them from the US or selling them in the US would be violating US copyright law even if they could find those same works on websites in Australia, for instance.

@Soulgenesis: "Kindle" bursting into flames...ha...good one.

@TristanGlabrio: Ah! ok; context sure helps a lot.

Malux

This is a bad sign of things to come. What if apple did this with your music? They could just "take back" your music when the songs get popular, and give you your 99 cents back, but it would cost you $1.29 to buy them back, with 30 cents of extra profit going to apple...

I'd feel bad for you, except for the fact that you got a refund.

Quit yer cryin'.

NinjaTaco

@MostlyHarmless: or brave new world (double posted...oops)

Malux

@MostlyHarmless or brave new world :) heheh

Malux

As long as they are deleting dystopian parables, wouldn't it be poetic if they also wiped out all copies of "Fahrenheit 451"?

BettinaMcCabe

@CSX321:
"or as authorized by Amazon as part of the Service'
Depends on what "as part of the Service" entails. If Amazon stipulates that the terms of sale are dependent on the willingness of the publisher to give access to their content, then I think what they did is fair game.

I don't know why they should try to go the DRM route. How hard is it to pirate a .txt or .doc file? Seriously, books are more vulnerable than music/movies to pirating. This only encourages it.

Well yeah, they guaranteed I'd never buy one when they spewed DRM all over the books from day one. Fail.

mullingitover

@Justinpaulson: You can thank Disney's fear of letting Mickey go into the public domain for us having a nice "life +70" term of copyright, or "an additional 28 years + another 67," or 120 years, or...

With this one less-than-deft move Amazon has killed the Kindle. The hoops they'll have to jump through now to maintain, let alone expand, the viablity of the Kindle as a marketplace for the written worked is f*cked beyond measure.

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: This is exactly what "non-exclusive" means

Dillinger23

I WAS looking forward to the day when we can download knowledge directly into our implanted hard drives, but if they can legally remove my knowledge of how to speak another language, I'm just gonna go kill myself.. We need laws that prevent this kind of bull.

"But I told him when I sold him the TV that I might want it back! He was sleeping so I took it and just left the cash on the night stand.."

@bud-strange: Maybe because it was a $0.99 purchase? Hardly enough to get all up in arms about. Plus it was from a publisher that didn't own the rights to the book and that is why it was pulled. The official versions are still available.

@Justinpaulson: Yeah, even more so now.

Dillinger23

Thank you Amazon, for making my mind up about never buying e-books or even Kindle from you. Your management and the publisher deserve that finger x 100 billion times.

vf34wrx

@tiroes:

Yep. And this is why I back up all my books and remove the DRM. If I bought it, I'm going to keep it.

FigNinja

@SantayaniPolites: Not having any idea what's in the EULA or ToS for the Kindle, I still rather suspect that most people "consented" to this very thing happening.

"If you can't be sure that you own something after you pay for it, what's the point?"

Nobody worried about it until it happened.

In a psuedo-related note, people crying over dead trees for books make me lol. Trees are grown on privately owned property for the very purpose of *gasp* turning to paper. If you have a problem with dead trees take it up with the governments of foreign nations, but have some respect for property rights.

Delano_J

@Malux: Just what I was thinking. Would have been completely awesome if they had deleted Fahrenheit 451 instead.

Wow. Guess Big Brother really is looking out for you...Oh, wait. That's right! Kindle owners have no idea what I'm talking about...

Kind of a Catch-22 situation, huh?

Sprzout

@TristanGlabrio: Yeah, the issue was with a Mobi version of the books that they DIDN'T HAVE RIGHTS TO. It would be nice if that was pointed out anywhere in the article.

So where is the outrage?
Why is Amazon not being sued wildly for this action?

If i go buy a paper or book and they want it back...at the very least they must pay me but even then i am not required to sell it to them. I think if i owned this e-book and a kindle i would be talking to my lawyer about his new Clash Action Suit.

Im pretty sure that violates interstate commerce laws.

bud-strange

@tiroes: Or at some point in the future going out of business and disconnecting their DRM servers. Or releasing new products while discontinuing support for old DRM'd products. That is what concerns me about this move to digital downloads. Everytime that subject comes up, it appears that a high percentage of commenters are cheering and applauding this move away from physical media. THIS is the second strike against digital media ownership.

The first strike is impossibility of ownership transfer.

winshape

Yep. I'll never buy one either.

BridgetTabasco

Hello, Amazon? We publish some books that deride the idea of a "Big Brother" watching and controling people. But, we just wanted make make it clear that we are not against the "practice" of a "Big Brother" doing those things. So, we need you to remotely delete all the copies of 1984 you've sold to Kindle users. And, while you're at it, let's go ahead and throw Animal Farm in there as well.

So, you'll do that for us. Excellent.

@Valnen: She can buy it herself if she still wants one (doubtful), I was going to buy one for her this week, we were toying with the idea of waiting to see other e-readers pop-up, but due to the recent price drop, I asked her if she wanted it. She would not want it under these circumstances.

She didn't like my choice of phone either, so she's stuck with the craptastic RAZR because she wanted pink.

Lizard_King

when did they start shipping color e-ink kindles? even if it can only display the finger, color e-ink is a big step...

hoffmanbike

So, I guess Amazon's WhisperSync told those unfortunate enough to have those books, "Shh...I'm just ripping off your stuff and leaving you some coin."

Kinda like the tooth fairy. Damn you tooth fairy!

smegz

@tiroes:
Not to mention Amazon could simply brick your Kindle if they felt like it.

@92BuickLeSabre: I'd be alright with someone remotley deleting some transfat from my mid region and refunding me the cost of the burgers that put it there

Hooray4Zoidberg

*Sony Reader cheers loudly*

@all: no, guys. you got it all wrong. adam and i were playing that poker game with the serial numbers on the dollar bills. i lost. so then we played strip poker. tee he he

@tande04 mile island in the sun: And all it would cost him is his dignity.

madog

Ok sorry for the rude comment about Random House-parent company of Secker and Warburg.

Not to play devils advocate but Amazon WAS only following the wishes of the "publisher" who incidentally remain unnamed in any of the articles on this topic.

@lostarchitect: Ah, I see. I kinda figured something in that ballpark, thanks for clarifying.

digital copies and cloud copies are two different things. I actually think i might have a digital copy of animal farm that i downloaded..well...illegally. But amazon or any other company could never take it away from me since i have it and many other books stored on an external hard drive that i hook up to my computer only once in a while.


now should i have bought the book from amazon or whomever, they could i'm sure put a piece of code on my computer that would automatically delete the copy...but that would be a big step up from this.


moral of the story: when you buy a digital copy, imho you own it. When you buy a cloud copy though, you are just renting it (as proven here in what amazon did to its kindle users)

michael haendler

well.. we're one step closer to farenheit 451... oh the irony if that were to get pulled also

hoffmanbike

Interesting. While I would say the publisher has the right to STOP selling digital books if they want, but to remove it from the Kindles of the people who own them in a little messed up.

If anything let's blame, the Publisher that requested this, and boycott their books.

Strider-No.9

File a police report that a couple of your books were stolen and you suspect that Jeff Bezos did it.

Ryan Rife

Well I was going to buy a Kindle now that they are $299 but if this is considered business as usual, I am going to reconsider my purchase.

xibis

Okay, put the pitchforks down... and Gizmodo (and Pogue) you both need to do your homework a bit better.

These were not 'legitimately purchased' - the 'publisher' did not have legal rights to be selling the books (at least in the U.S.) because they do not have the rights and they are NOT in the public domain. Amazon has done this before (Ayn Rand, recently) and will no doubt continue to do so when non-legitimate copies are posted online and sold.

The purchasers inadvertently bought stolen material, essentially and it is creepy that Amazon can just reach out and delete (always download a copy to your computer, people!) but so it goes.

The disadvantage of letting people upload and then publish quickly on the Kindle, YouTube, etc is that this stuff will happen - the advantages are clear enough.

BessBatakas

@lostarchitect: oops, sorry, meant to post that elsewhere.

This looks to be a case of a bad copy of 1984 being removed from the kindle store, not a major publisher changing their mind. If you read the amazon discussion, this has happened before. Which makes sense. I could self publish a book called 1984 on kindle and just upload an ebook I found somewhere else. If people buy it, and amazon finds out, they probably remove those non legit copies and refund the users. If you look here: http://www.amazon.com/Nineteen-Eighty-Four/dp/B002A9JO9W/ref=sr_oe_2_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1247861828&sr=1-2 it looks like the book is still available from a major publisher.

TristanGlabrio

@Lizard_King: You tell your wife what she can or can't own? Control freak.

@tande04 mile island in the sun: i moonlight as the toothfairy. give me a friggin' break

@lostarchitect & Nick: Yep thats what it means. The meaning behind it is that there is "someone" (remember for legal purposes companies are "people") that has the exclusive right and they trump your non-exclusive right.

I'd like to share this post with students, but I can't because of the obscene finger gesture in the photo. I know, I know, I sound prudish, and it doesn't offend ME, personally, but I cannot show it in a classroom. I hope it's not a violation of copyright if I copy and paste the text into a Word document? It's an important topic for students to discuss.

CarynGalolahere

i think that if the book was Fahrenheit 451, the kindle would have just burst into flames.

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: Oh we know where that would lead with you now.

All he'd be left with is a pile of singles.

@joelydanger: I believe that means that they reserve the right to use a different licensing agreement to modify the standard one. for example, when you download book A there is an additional agreement that modifies terms X Y and Z from the original one, or replaces it entirely.

Wow. I knew they had the right to do that but I never actually expected to see it happen. That's terrible. They really need to improve the e-book business before it will be worth it. It's a shame really, paper (especially the kind found in cheap books or newspaper) bothers my skin so I have a difficult time reading for extended lengths, so the kindle would be perfect for me. But I won't be buying one either until they improve the business.

"Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer- except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs."

PaddyDugan

@kylenalepa: I always figured that e-books would eventually settle into a primary market of academic use. Students will like the convenience, professors can distribute materials more efficiently, and publishers stand to lose a lot less money from textbook resellers. (Of course, the last one is bad for everyone but the publishers, but something has to be able to win them over.)

Grandma and grandpa already weren't gonna be going for electronic books for casual reading, and this event will pretty much take care of everyone else.

puhsitch

@SchuylerDafoe:You should just get an iPod touch or a netbook.

Dillinger23

What about people who have highlighted/taken notes (as I understand you can do with with kindle)? Is their work lost forever?

liku

@Hand_O_Death:You never know, it could have been a Slanket full of singles.

Dillinger23

@Purple Monkey Dishwasher: Meh, I'm used to tech companies have a "bitch switch" built into their products. I'm content with big brother now in days as I have thrown away my tin foil hat.

tok3ninja; is the best non-star commenter

Oh and p.s. fuck Random House too.

@RainyDayInterns: it's more of a license... you pay for the license of the electronic book

taking_this_easy

This, to me, is kind of like the problem Sony is going to have with the PSPgo, namely: what if I get tired of my PSN name and create a new account? What if I have to create a new account? That's why I'd still rather have the hard copy.

thebigcheese

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: Yeah that's what I interpreted from it. Although like olternaut said, I don't understand what "...unless otherwise expressly provide by Amazon" means. If someone could enlighten me it would be greatly appreciated.

@Hand_O_Death: Naw, Nick just makes it rain on these hos (hoes? ho's?)

thegreatfratsby

People should ship their Kindles back and take $400 from Amazon's account (Be sure to send them an email because, apparently, that makes it ok)

Malux

This is BS. Big company like Amazon can delete legally purchased item remotely? If we purchased an item from them, to return the item, we'll be charged 15% restocking fee, can't return them after so and so days... now they did it remotely without owner's consent, permission, agreement etc...Refunding is not equal to sorry i access your kindle and delete your book!

This is not a fair practice. I smell lawsuits.

nexgenmax

The Kindle already guaranteed I am not buying another Stephen King book, now it is guaranteeing I will never buy a Kindle.

@Justinpaulson:mmm, The All NEW Kindle tin-foil Hat.

talk about Orwellian! Is the irony of this lost on Amazon and the publishers ? This is hilarious, sad and scary at the same time.

Next, they'll start rewriting yesterdays news to make it agree with Big Brother's views today.

Time to move to Iceland...

Malux

@RainyDayInterns: Therein lies the problem of DRM and proprietary products. Now when you buy something, it isn't really yours. The company is just letting you use it until they decide you have used it enough, or maybe they don't feel like letting you have it anymore. Then they take it away.

tiroes

@Purple Monkey Dishwasher: I don't own an iphone so I don't know, but can't the same be said about the control Apple has over that product?

@bosskev: I almost wish you weren't starred so I could have promoted this comment. I love the irony :)

hahaha technology....

astrograph

@bosskev: And, even though he left singles, he still stole Adam's book.

Purple Monkey Dishwasher

Pulling those particular books in such a manner is hugely ironic. How do they just "change their mind" and that's ok?

robogobo

Funny that 1984 and animal farm are two of the most popular books in high school English classes. I thought Amazon was TRYING to get their kindles in schools? Kind of a dumb move to remove one of the most popular high school assignments.

That is most egregious. Once payment has been received and goods delivered, isn't the ownership of the said item transferred?

Taking something back and leaving payment is not necessarily ok...rather isn't that considered...stealing?

If Amazon want the copy back...shouldn't they have to pay the price asked by the new owner? What if the owner feels the digital copy is worth 10x the price?

WOW! That sounds like a move a company like Cablevision would pull on it's customers...

mkix

"And of course the fact that this happened to 1984, of all books, makes this even more surreal."

Only thing I can think of that would have been more surreal is if the book were 'Fahrenheit 451' since they burn (delete) books.

But in all seriousness, holy crap. This is the one big thing I don't like with the idea of going to digital "rental" rights. If a publisher decides they want their (hardcopy) books back, they have to offer incentives, and even then they won't get them all back. That they can just wipe your digital copies without consent you'd think would send all those consumer watchdog groups up in arms.

Kogenta

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: HA, oh Nick...

aaaahhhh....The ironing is delicious.

In other news, Amazon are evil bastards.

Hey Amazon: I was on the fence about buying one of these. Not anymore. You lost another sale.

@Hello Mister Walrus: The ironic thing is these books are available for free through many other digital book readers (maybe not legally?).

T-Will

Mind-blowing.

I was never a fan of e-books in the first place, with the exception of textbooks or other required reading for school/work (I prefer the tactile sense of paper when reading something for fun), but I never even knew it was possible for legally purchased books could be remotely deleted.

I would have recommended the Kindle to anybody looking for an e-book reader in the past, but I will never do that again. Amazon can go screw itself.

kylenalepa

@anoteoftruth:

I'd rather the .mp3 or digital movie analogy. Once you pay for a download it's yours. Can you imagine what would happen if a music label asked Apple to remotely delete all the copies of a song and Apple actually agreed?
There would be riots in the streets!

olternaut

@bosskev: Ah, delicious, delicious irony for Orwell books being deleted by Big Amazon.

secretmanofagent

@Skeetz: so does everything, but do you have MORE control over something physical.

@Skeetz: Good point, I usually encode my MP3's under 28kbps in case I want to stream them over my 14.4 baud modem.

T-Will

@Magic Beans? Sure, I'll Buy Some!!: Kindle is wirelessly attached to cell networks. It's called whispernet, they piggy-back off of sprint towers.

@tande04 mile island in the sun: I believe "non-exclusive right" just means they will give others this right too (ie, other people can d/l the book, not just you), and "or as authorized by amazon" modifies "solely on the device", meaning "if amazon lets you, you can look at this on another device".

so to me, it appears they HAVE violated their own ToS. Not that I am a lawyer, but that's my reading.

@Hand_O_Death: When they came for my books I did not speak up, because I was in the library.

so, when we want to burn the books and make sure no one reads about a controversial topic, all we need to do is bribe a nerd. Another reason why kindle can't replace real books!

prabhjot_1992

@Magic Beans? Sure, I'll Buy Some!!:

It sorta acts like a free cell phone I think. Amazon made a deal with Sprint to provide the wireless service. Instead of phone calls though u get access to the Kindle Service.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

olternaut

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: If you paid in singles, it could not have been THAT good.

@Polzin: Your Friendly Neighborhood Bagel Farmer: Not really. Those singles were lifted from my wallet while I slept.

The awesome power of the Ministry of Truth is just beginning to be felt as the socialists experiment with their new-found muscles.

KerriGabs

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: So you raped him twice? took his book and his dignity? cruel bastard!

I hope they come and take back the Kindle from people who now no longer want it and want their $400 bucks back.

Purple Monkey Dishwasher

@Possinator: Yep, who needs a Kindle? I'm happy with my hacked PSP and .txt files!

PigVenus

This isn't just what keeps me away from the Kindle, but from DRM'd media altogether.

Why buy something you never really own?

HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H.

@Hello Mister Walrus: Orwell came back and wrote a book about DRMs?

Can't wait to explain to my wife why she is not getting a Kindle. This bullshit is exactly why I don't like digital purchases - we give up too much control for convenience.

Lizard_King

WoW, big shocker there, considering Amazon owns Alexa. Those of you worried about Google and their quest for world domination should take a look over the other shoulder...."Big Brother ain't watching you mate, you're fucking watching him"- Crass, Nineteen Eighty Bore

I just won't by a kindle because right now it's the only player in the game. Once Amazon starts to feel some more pressure and actually has a competition, then I might decide to get one.Making moves like this turns me off even more.

@tande04 mile island in the sun: doesn't non-exclusive just mean a bunch of people can own the same thing? it's the permanent copy part that doesn't hold water

CSX321 is right regarding them violiting their own ToS. Removing it from the store for future purchase was within their rights, however remotely deleting said content from people who had already purchased it constitutes a breach of contract and is in fact grounds for a lawsuit.

SantayaniPolites

That's pretty f'd up. It would've been cool though if instead of refunding just the price of the ebook, if they credited everyone's account with the price of the dead tree version.

ku1185

@Possinator: I support that decision on your part. It sounds to me like you need to do some reading anyways.

@Lupison: You don't have complete control over CD's or RAID drives. They go bad, they get scratched, they corrupt. Hell the best CD out there right now only lasts a 1000 years. After that you have to back it up or repurchase AGAIN. I use a USB key in my car and it's loaded with MP3's of the highest quality, some reaching up to 32kbps but most around 28 because that's how I roll. I find having that over a bunch of cd's is easier to manage and if it gets busted the backups are safe at home (as long as home isn't on fire).

Skeetz

Think your English teacher would buy that excuse? "Sorry, Amazon ate my homework last night..."

The very first sentence of this article neatly sums up my feelings. Not much more I can say.

Ric0chet

@bosskev: I try and avoid +1 or "win" comments but that comment takes the thread.

@SchuylerDafoe: wanna go get drunk instead?

@92BuickLeSabre: Then they came for my books, but I did not speak up because I was already done reading it.

Thank you for buying from Barnes & Noble, Adam. I was never a fan of eBooks to begin with, mainly because I like a physical copy far too much. But yes, we'll never break into your home to steal a book back.

Via la Retro!

@Nick: My island name is Nicko: this man deserves 2 stars

@CSX321:

What the hell does "unless otherwise expressly provide by Amazon." mean?
Is that an escape clause?

olternaut

"leaving me a pile of singles on my nightstand."
That always makes me feel cheap! ... and used!

╠═CoolRiver45═╣

leaving me a pile of singles on my nightstand.

actually, that was me. i had a great time last night. see ya next time i'm in town.

@Trevor Williams: That's exactly what I was thinking!

Tank

Does this qualify as the first Digital book burning?

Maxx_Needs_A_V8

I was going to buy a Kindle 2 as soon as I got home. I've been financially responsible and I've been saving $50 a week towards it rather than put it on my credit card. I had enough for the kindle and the book cover as of payday today... Forget it. This totally changed my mind. It's downright scary.

SchuylerDafoe

I guess this is the price you pay for the free internet contectivity that the Kindles have

Aaron Monroy

"Apparently, the publisher changed its mind about having electronic versions of Orwell's books."

I wonder why. This seems like a very random thing to decide to do.

Hello Mister Walrus

We deleted 1984 for your protection and you never had 1984 on your kindle.

all praise Big Brother he is double plus good.

victorkruger

@k-napped: Yeah nothing can replace those hand-cramps...nothing.

@os_2:
Class Action, anyone?

@FlipSwitch: I can do that at a Library though. Not much of a bright side.

Scott Jackson

@Dustinov: What are you talking about/ That did not happen... Did it now?
Be careful how you answer...

╠═CoolRiver45═╣

Wow, I agree. Don't buy any digital content with DRM. You don't really own anything apparently.

Saboth

@BeerManMike:

And then they came for the Trans Fats.
But I did not speak up because I was already trying to cut back on Trans Fats.

@froggy: Just because you have a kindle doesn't mean you have to buy your books from amazon.

Caution, Adam! You do want to be a goodthinker, don't you? This type of malreporting, flying in the face of Newspeak as it does, might get you assigned to a joycamp or perhaps even vaporized as an unperson.

Far better to say that the blackwhite of it is that Amazon has relieved the people of the burden of ungood entertainment, making way for far more desireable content. Indeed, a steady supply of prolefeed is doubleplus good! Right, Adam?

@Bigbadbikernerd: Orwellian humor?

╠═CoolRiver45═╣

@Bigbadbikernerd: WHAT A BUNCH OF NAZIS!!

Hello Mister Walrus

I never turn on my Kindle wireless unless I'm making a purchase, so there is no way Amazon is deleting my purchases (until I turn it on, that is). Suck it Amazon... I'm finishing 1984!!!

mvivas

The books were written over 60 years ago and George Orwell Died in 1950...You'd think this would be public domain by now...geez.

@Bigbadbikernerd: Amazon MP3 does not sell DRM'd files so I don't think that they could delete them from your computer or render them unusable as long as you're not using software provided by them.

It sucks that Amazon has remote control of the content of your Kindle. If we keep going in this direction with our products we'll end up like in iRobot where all of a sudden they turn all the robots against us.

Purple Monkey Dishwasher

I'm curious how this took place. Is the Kindle wirelessly attached to your home network?

Magic Beans? Sure, I'll Buy Some!!

@CSX321: Sounds to me like its within the ToS.

"non-exclusive right" and "or as authorized by Amazon" pretty much get the out of anything.

It just like with digital downloads of any kind. They'll tell you that you don't really "own" it. You're being granted a license. That argument actually caries through to CDs (and I assume books too). You still don't "own it" (though its going to be a lot harder for them to get it from you) you own a license for the content that allows you certain benefits but that can be changed by the true "owner" as they see fit.

Thats too much power. Once you have it they should not be able to remove it. What other things can they do remotely??

Razta

Read your Terms of Service and license agreements, etc. for your Kindle content. If the Amazon guys have any brains, they provided for such claw-backs in those agreements. Assuming they did, the loss of content should not be a surprise. RTFD... read the FABULOUS documentation.

dnheller

Some books are more equal than others, apparently.

m4ximusprim3

In other news, Amazon has also remotely replaced all English dictionaries by their revised Newspeak dictionary.

I love that pic. Made me laugh though I have no relevant comment about the content of the article.

The people who finished reading those books already still got a refund though, so it really was kind of a good deal for them. They got to read the book for free on their Kindles. That's looking on the bright side. This really shouldn't have happened.

FlipSwitch

See is all coming together, digital media deleted at an instant and you can't say anything!, Ban on trans fats.. but its for your own good!, Cameras on every street corner... but its for your safety! Each thing on its own sounds good and conspiracy theories are easily dismisssed, but combine the 100's of things like the above happening daily then you get the big picture, unfortunatly that big picture is a .jpg and was remotely deleted.

BeerManMike

haha.. i smell a lawsuit brewing among the mob of kindle owners.

os_2

@Enigmaaron1: Pah. I'd disconnect from the internet and run away as far as I possibly could, joining hundreds of other Kindle users in the same situation.

Absolutely ridiculous. Does Bezos know how STUPID him and his company look now? Probably not.
How the hell could the publisher change his mind like that? Didn't he sign some sort of agreement? If this was Apple Steve Jobs would be still screaming "NO! ONCE A CUSTOMER PAYS FOR A DOWNLOAD IT'S THEIRS!" into the publisher's ear while simultaneously stomping his guts out!

olternaut

at least with apple, if a dev wants to remove something from the app store, anyone who bought it while it was up still keeps it. This "remotely deleted" shit is insane.. I would never lay down money on something that has even the possibility of this happening.

This is completely insane. Just because they have the technology doesn't mean they should use it. That should be reserved for when publishers put the Hot Coffee mod into their e-books.

indeed, as far as I'm concerned amazon just murdered the Kindle. Even on the iPhone if an app is removed from the store anyone who bought the app can still use it as long as it's not on the black list(even netshare isn't blacklisted as far as I know).

logicalnoise

see? that's why I have a Sony eBook reader. No Amazon pocking it's silly nose in my business. Oh, and to drive the point? I bought it from Amazon.com.

I agree with the writer... This pretty much garuntee's I will never buy a Kindle.

It seems to me that they have violated the Kindle License Agreement and Terms of Service:

"Use of Digital Content. Upon your payment of the applicable fees set by Amazon, Amazon grants you the non-exclusive right to keep a permanent copy of the applicable Digital Content and to view, use, and display such Digital Content an unlimited number of times, solely on the Device or as authorized by Amazon as part of the Service and solely for your personal, non-commercial use. Digital Content will be deemed licensed to you by Amazon under this Agreement unless otherwise expressly provided by Amazon."

CSX321

Wow. That's... umm.. wow. Gotta agree with Frucci tho, no Kindle for me!

aja175

No worries, I'll just download load both books off the internet.

Possinator

Well at least Kindle owners don't have to worry about their books being set on fire. They'll just magically disappear without all the unnecessary fumes...although I guess a person could never go up in flames with their collection in protest of having their rights stepped on.

the downside of this era is the fact that we own nothing we are just renting with an option to be beaten and robbed

Kamenwati

Wow, the irony is amazing. But seriously, why couldn't this just be a decision moving forward? Why did they have to act retroactively? That's ridiculous...

Scott Jackson

Wow, that's pretty ballsy on Amazon's part.

I still think digital books are stupid. There's nothing that can replace the feeling of paging through a novel... and I hope there never will be.

Yup, that kills that for me as well. Never buying a kindle.

I've been on the fence about getting a kindle for that last couple of months and with my birthday coming up I was seriously thinking about splurging and getting one for myself. After reading this.. No way, No how!

Look out moderately cheaper Chinese knock off, here I come!!!

Maxx_Needs_A_V8

this is so wrong on so many levels. think about how this would work if a publisher decided they all of a sudden didn't want to publish a print version of their book. They couldn't enter your house, take your book and hand you a refund. Sound ridiculous? It is. That's why it never happens!

Just because the media is electronic now doesn't mean that it's any less yours.

Once you pay for something, you OWN it.

Gene Gemperline

Purchasing Tangible Paper-Based Objects to Read FTW!

http://gizmodo.com/5290328/busted-why-i-cant-wait-for-flexible-disp...

Haha! That's funny.

marcus1060

At least the Kindle's still work. Imagine if Farenheit 451 was one of the books to be removed.

umm... how about we do it in reverse. I'll send back my kindle with all my purchased books and say I've decided to pull the unit from my house. oh and I want my pile of singles too.

irony so think you can cut it with a spoon

spider2544

1984? This is the very definition of irony.

Trevor Williams

This is why I always purchase music I actually care about on CD. I'll only occasionally buy a 1 hit wonder mp3 for download. The CD is better quality to play in the car or at home, and a backup in case some electronic thing crashes on me. I love the idea of the Kindle, I love my iPhone app "Classics", but I really don't see myself taking this kind have plunge until I know I can purchase some sort of hard copy backup. Either to some computer that I can burn onto a CD or on a RAID drive, something anything. I hate having something something I bought stored on something I don't have complete control over.

Lupison

This is literally inexcusable. There is no way this is legal.

I don't know much about law though. So I could be very wrong.

All past sales should be protected from this sort of thing.

What if a band decides they don't like electronic versions of their songs. Will iTunes just delete it from your ipod? Will amazon delete a song from my computer?

What a bunch of asshats!

I've eyeballed these e-readers salaciously since they've been on the market. This story just soured me on the kindle. I wonder as to the status of Google Books being released to the Sony Reader...

Really the lack of back-lighting and reverse contrast (white text on black) on any of them leaves my trusty Tungsten T3 in the lead. I needs my bedtime stories...

tnt-tek

quite ironic with 1984 being one of the titles deleted...maybe they wanted to start the "Ministry of Commerce and Free Trade"?

Dustinov

Now on eBay: 1 kindle in a faraday cage containing rare digital copy of 1984.

ubermex

Maybe they were trying to prove a point to all of those who were reading 1984. Kinda like, "you see? Now become the resistance."

havoks

this is the downside to the digital age. they are always taking our cash and the screwing us in the ass because they mess up. yet another reason why you should steal your digital shit.

Big brother just doesn't want you to know...

I was looking at getting one, but this more or less will stop me from ever getting one.

HainesAegyptus

simply amazes me. shame on you amazon.

greenythebeast

Can you smell the irony?

LyndonNotus

@dalejrfanfreak: The downloading bit is okay if you actually own the media. Like own own. Like if they try to take it, I stab them. That kind of own.

Identity: The Sequel.

For shame, Amazon.

Where does it stop? If I buy a song on iTunes, doesn't that mean I have bought the right to listen to that song whenever I want for perpetuity?

Or what if you buy an XBox Live game? How would you feel if one day it was just gone, and all you had were your XBox Live points back?

It would never end...

@Michael Coogan: Nevertheless, Amazon shouldn't have the right (or EXERCISE it) under any circumstances. Once it's out, it's OUT.

You can embrace the future with an e-book reader without it being a Kindle.

How to know if you're failing: if SONY has less DRM than you.

@nutbastard: "and replaced em with Catcher In The Rye"

I'd like to subscribe to your Conspiracy Theory newsletter.

PDA FTW. Palmsized, color, backlit, expandable, open format and oh yea, I don't have to worry about some business deciding I no longer have a right to the book I purchased.

Oh and one other big factor. I can get a new PDA for less than $100.

SunanditaVintersorg

Yeah this is creepy and wrong. But I'm in way too deep, I can't quit my Kindle. I would happily switch to some other company's ebook device (as long as it had a screen at least as big as the Kindle2 has). I still love print books and buy them by the dozen. but ereading is here to stay (with me anyway), I love love love love having the Kindle around on my train commute, in doctor's offices, etc. and can read whatever title I'm in the mood to read at that moment...carrying 50 books around at once.... and yeah if ya bought and paid for 1984 or Animal Farm it was unncessary you can get it for free from Gutenberg and email it to your Kindle.

OttaviaGalokie

If you download Fahrenheit 451, does your Kindle burst into flames?

stuny

It wasn't really that they changed their minds, from what I am reading the person who said they had the rights to the book never really did and it is only now being noticed. The people who purchased the books were refunded so its more an error on amazon's part.

Michael Coogan

@My father was a service droid!!!: How many Internets does that translate to?

Sabbatai

@Jordan Lund: Kind of you Sir or Madame.

Cheers!

Sabbatai

Of all the books this could have happened to...lol it's a conspiracy theorist's dream come true.

I don't believe I will be using Amazon or any of it's associated websites at all after this in any case.

Sabbatai

And some of you guys want to download all of your music, movies, games, etc. THIS is why digital downloads will not replace physical media.

dalejrfanfreak

@BessBatakas: The problem with the technology is that they can remotely delete books. That capability should not be there, period, and it's already getting abused.

Whenever some lawyer thinks you didn't buy something legally, there is no lawsuit. There is no police. There is not even a "poof" sound - stuff just disappears.

orthorim

@frigg: LOL

orthorim

This must be one of the most epic fails in product history.

I can't think of any other recent technology that publicly committed suicide quite so spectacularly.

Not only can they remotely delete books that you paid for, no, that was not enough. They chose to demonstrate this capability using 1984 and Animal Farm!

You couldn't make this up, nobody would believe it.

orthorim

Exactly why I bought a BeBook. I keep total control over all the books I've acquired. Plus, I can back them up, the way the Flying Spaghetti Monster intended!

archpope

At least the onboard e-dictionary was also updated last night to redefine "irony" as the involuntary removal of "1984" and "Animal Farm" from peoples' kindles.

Amazon is the badass company. Don't think of crossing it.

tillman

Oh my god it's a color Kindle!

You most certainly CAN show it in a classroom. Stop treating your students like infantile imbeciles and give them some respect.

TateBat

If consumers continue their ignorant and spineless behaviors with regard to digital properties, scenarios like this will become increasingly commonplace. Customers SHOULD HAVE refused to agree to Amazons conditions of acceptable usage of the Kindle. They should have demanded that Amazon guarantee the availability of purchased books FOR LIFE. They should have demanded that the books be transferrable to other people (so you could sell the book when you finished with it, or give it away to a friend). They should have demanded that functionality be built in to allow loaning a book to a friend.

Is no one bothered by the fact that if libraries were being proposed today, they wouldn't have a chance in hell of legal survival? Imagine if someone proposed opening a digital library online and providing ALL BOOKS, without permission of the publishers, to the public for very minimal cost on a limited time basis. Now add in music, movies, videogames, and other forms of media. Such a site would be buried in litigation, and it would lose each and every single case. We have let this happen. And every single person who purchases a "license" for a work that is restricted in absurd ways lends legitimacy to this new paradigm where nothing is owned, and useless middlemen (publishing companies provide absolutely no useful service any longer and should all go the way of buggy whip manufacturers) control your property.

TateBat

wait... THATS the reason you'd never buy a Kindle? They got refunds, i wouldnt really be all that upset if i bought a book and was given a refund for it (especially if i'd already read it) you know why -I- wouldnt buy one? you're basically paying 300 dollars for a bunch of blank pages, which you then have to pay to fill....

shorty6049

I totally agree. I'm happy this happened before I decided to upgrade from my PRS-500 sometime in the near future. I had been considering a Kindle, but I'll stick with Sony now.

bitgod

I only wish that Barnes & Noble workers were my worst fear. If I don't pull all 12 of the deadbolts on my front door I'd sure have been killed by the space crabs by now. :(

I read this earlier on a Kindle board and it seems like the sell didn't have the rights to publish these books. 1984 and Animal Farm are still under copyright and not in the public domain, the publisher (MobileReference or Mobi) publishes a lot of public domain stuff for the Kindle and may have messed up on this one.

So if they are selling it without permission of the Orwell estate then these books were not "legally purchased" as you're alluding to. The Orwell estate is very proactive about their rights, they even sent Apple a cease & desist after their 1984 SuperBowl ad because Apple didn't get permission to use 1984 in their ad.

cryfordawn

@TristanGlabrio:
That's not the point. The point is, that Amazon can delete something I own from a device I own. Violating copyright laws? great. And what if the another «law» all of a sudden prohibits the possession of certain books? Then, this functionality comes in very handy. I don't like that and therefor will NEVER buy a kindle...

swissdude

@Curves: Now there's a surprise!

Blakamin

Well, that cinches it - I was considering a Kindle in my future, but from this point forward, I will think on Kindle no more...

Mark Jaress

@Mason Strong:
and here i thought you weren't using itunes because of the clause stating that itunes should not be used for the development of biological weapons.

sweenish

And of course the fact that this happened to 1984, of all books, makes this even more surreal.

You got that right. I don't like the idea of my content being remotely deleted.. if removed from the library on amazon. (Or at all period)

That's bs.

I mean its like me buying a full game on xbox live.. then a game publisher going, oh! were moving it to disc only. And Microsoft deleting it from my xbox360 the next time I signed on.

--Core--

@Mason Strong: it may be the case that iTunes has that it their EULA, I'm not going to to bother going over to iTunes right now and look it up; but they don't use drm on any of their music anymore so how would that be enforceable? I've bought tracks from them recently and they don't even use the m4p (meaning the track has drm) encryption anymore. it's all m4a. I can copy the songs to other computers and generally move them around without "authorizing" the new computer.

This article really got me thinking. I don't own, and will not ever own a Kindle for this reason.
But there are some points Adam makes that should provoke more thought.
The article points out:
"If you can't be sure that you own something after you pay for it, what's the point?"
And
"Once I buy a book from Barnes & Noble, I never have to worry about them breaking into my house and taking it back, leaving me a pile of singles on my nightstand."
If you study history this has happened numerous times. Being digital and ‘attached’ to the web or a network just makes it easier to ‘revoke’. Just because it is in ‘hard copy’ doesn’t mean it can’t or won’t be revoked or taken back at some time if the owner or state deems it necessary to do so. Virtually every oppressive revolution starts with the killing of the opposition leaders. Next, the confiscation of previously legal firearms - because you can't protect your 'inalienable rights' at the point of a gun with words and reason. And finally, the confiscation of previously legal literature and communications devices.
If people keep sheepishly agreeing to these ridiculous 'licensing' clauses and the government does nothing to restrict them but in fact upholds and strengthens them and their own powers, it will be only a matter of time before nothing is owned and all is licensed - from corporations or the state. [Will there be a difference in the future?]
Also in a comment 'i_Replyguy' says, "Physical media are a thing of the past."
I am a firm believer in non-proprietary, open and non restrictive EULA's. But somewhere somehow that information must be 'stored' somewhere physically and played/used on some type of physical/machine device. Right? So if it can be removed/deleted or otherwise deemed illegal you are in trouble with 'big brother'. I Couldn't resist that last one.
Just my earned and taxed two cents worth.

it IS pretty awesome that it was two Orwell books they did it to. You can't make that kind of shit up.

whiteflea

@Spoony Bard: Actually, iTunes *can* remove any song you purchase from them. In fact, you are not even buying a song. You are buying the rights to listen to that song for an indefinite amount of time, which apple can revoke at any time, without notice to you.

I read the EULA, and I will never use iTunes. Ever.

Mason Strong

Could Amazon have done anything to stop such an act? Really now, Amazon needs to strengthen their contracts with publishers. Shame on the publisher.

The publisher didn't have rights to the book in the US, which means Amazon didn't have the right to sell it in the first place. A physical bookseller would probably have issued a mandatory recall in this situation, and attempted to contact everyone it sold the book to. Failing that, it would have opened itself up to contributory copyright infringement charges or lawsuits. If it did manage to contact buyers, and those buyers ignored the recall, the buyers might open themselves up to charges of accepting stolen goods.

Because Amazon knows who bought the books and has the ability to control what is on those Kindles, if it had not deleted those books, it could open itself up to a lawsuit. More importantly, it could lose the trust of eBook publishers, and if that happens, it's basically dead.

What happened here is nothing more than an enforced, mandatory recall of a product that was illegally sold. I think it's unfair to crucify Amazon for the improper actions of a third-party publisher.

@dalejrfanfreak: You don't get it. This is why sensible consumers do not buy into proprietary digital crap from Amazon, Apple & Microsoft and we choose MP3, JPG & other open source standards. Physical media are a thing of the past.

i_Replyguy

Before you all go on a /. style righteous rage of "OMG! INVASION OF PRIVACY!" and so on, try actually reading the original news item, especially where it links to this other article...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html?_r=1

"An Amazon spokesman, Drew Herdener, said in an e-mail message that the books were added to the Kindle store by a company that did not have rights to them, using a self-service function. “When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from customers’ devices, and refunded customers,” he said.

Amazon effectively acknowledged that the deletions were a bad idea. “We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances,” Mr. Herdener said."

KyleLooney

two questions:

1. Who is the publisher?
2. Will Amazon be paying interest to the purchasers, or was this a way to get interest free money from us for however long these ebooks were on the market till it was pulled, and refunds were issued?

MelissaTobias

@DorothyMantooth: If Amazon wants to retain Safe Harbor protection under the DMCA (which I'm sure they do) they must respond to any reasonable copyright claim by removing the content in question ASAP and notifying the person who placed the content on its system.
That person may file a counterclaim asserting its legal right to place the content on the service, at which point Amazon can restore the content while the two parties argue it out in court or wherever.

The second it stops doing adhereing to that procedure, it loses its Safe Harbor protection and becomes vulnerable to legal action.

YouTube is subject to the same Safe Harbor provision, as are most hosting services and ISPs.

Whatever Amazon tries to do to restore the content is irrelevant; it HAS to remove the content if it receives a legit copyright claim alleging infringement.

There is no way that this happened with Animal Farm and 1984

@TateBat:I pray for the day people wake up and realize what these greedy and now-required middleman companies are REALLY doing.

They aren't protecting anything but their own bank accounts.

They are more than happy to see the concept of a library going the way of the dodo.

@kylenalepa: I think that if the e-books were sold for close to the same amount as the paper versions, the publishers would have less to complain about. Students would still jump on the high tech even if they weren't saving a lot of money, and publishers would use DRM to keep down sharing and ultimately reduce losses that typically come from the used book market.

puhsitch

@TateBat: Your last paragraph should be published. Best Analogy Award on the issue.

reecerose

@Digitallysick: Heh. Yeah, you've broken the law there. But the crime that you've committing is breaking and entering. Not theft.

@uchendunwachukwu: That's a fair point, but it ignores any other options that may have been available to Amazon at the time. Through its sheer size and market strength, not to mention its position relative to book publishers, Amazon has a ton of power. Simply caving in the face of this unspecified "notification" -- threat of a lawsuit at this point is certainly possible, but WAY premature to be meaningful -- by the "rights holder" does not reflect well on Amazon.

Amazon must always consider its most important relationship to be that with its customers. It could have attempted to work out a deal after the fact with the (also unspecified) "rights holder" to allow Kindle users to keep the books. (In fact, the NYT article references Amazon's statement that they're supposedly working to ensure that this doesn't happen again.) There is no evidence that Amazon attempted to do so in this instance.

WOW! My copy was deleted while I was half way finished reading Burmese Day which upset me greatly so I emailed amazon and here is the lame response that they sent back:

Hello,

We recently discovered a problem with some Kindle book on our Kindle store. These books "1984 and Animal Farm" were added to our catalog using our self-service platform by a third-party who did not have the rights to the books.

When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from devices, and issued a full refund to your account.

We are working with the authorized rights holder to make this title available in our store very soon. We apologize for any inconvenience the removal of these titles may cause.

We value our customers and did not intended this to happen. I hope you'll give us another chance in the future.

Thank you for your patience and understanding.

Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:

If yes, click here:

If not, click here:


Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming e-mail.

To contact us about an unrelated issue, please visit the Help section of our web site.

Best regards,

Keerthi
Amazon.com
We're Building Earth's Most Customer-Centric Company
http://www.amazon.com/your-account

ManfredCrassipes

@uchendunwachukwu: I haven't read the case law on this, whereas it seems like you have, so I'll ask you: Does "removing content" extend to deleting end-user files? Or would it be acceptable merely to immediately disable the link so no one else could purchase the infringing product? While I could certainly be wrong, the latter strikes me as a reasonable, and appropriate, reading of the Act. (To that end, "restoring the content" would be re-enabling the purchase link.)

If the former, I would argue that the YouTube comparison is inapposite because removing the offending video prevents further people from viewing it. "You watched it. You can't unwatch it!" (Stay tuned for more Tales of Interest.)

@TateBat: Spot on, well-said, 'enjoyed.

Walljasper

@Mason Strong: Like EULAs are even legally binding.

metaslugx

Don't be surprised when the day arrives that the personal ideas or thoughts that are engendered from reading or hearing licensed books, etc. come under political attack via the "rule of law" as copyright or patent infringements; where any "public" or shared expression of such ideas or thoughts could be legally punished in either criminal and/or civil proceedings...let alone a "recall".

After all, we have already seen a formidable growth in punishing thoughts vs. deeds just in the past 10-15 years, ripping apart the notion of "equal protection under the law"; so-called "hate crime' provisos. Little matter that you assaulted or killed someone, now we have allowed the establishment of legal protocols and punishments based on the ideas, thoughts, rationale of the accused; that is via political divination, aka political correctness.

Walljasper

@Purple Monkey Dishwasher: Hahah! lol!

Walljasper

Sooner or later, someone or some group within our beloved imperial gubamint might - WILL - also make such a decision, based ostensibly on "the rule of law".

Little matter that our freedoms can readily be smothered "lawyerly" politicians and their equally smarmy legal minions, all well-fed at an unlimited trough of our own stolen dollars, armed to relentlessly injure or destroy our rights at will.

Walljasper

@Jordan Lund: Which is great if you live in Australia. In the USA, that's called "stealing" and is at the heart of why this whole fiasco happened in the first place.

The publisher that Amazon relied on for the use of 1984 and Animal Farm on the Kindle believed that those books were in the public domain. It came to light that it was only the case in Canada, not the USA.

So in short, even though it's Project Gutenberg, it's just as illegal in the USA and Europe as using a torrent link.

rentahero1

@uchendunwachukwu: Soooo, Region Coded Books? Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds?

Klappstuhl

@ubermex: lolz

the_wiggle

@olternaut: as well as lynchings, hackings, etc.

the_wiggle

@Skeetz: toss a spare usb key in a safe box.

the_wiggle

@NeroVeto: taking the book is bad enough, taking your work is so much worse. i'm guessing the kindle didn't allow for back up copies of the work?

the_wiggle

@TateBat: we were required to read both in high school. no harm no foul.

the_wiggle

@uchendunwachukwu: Uh oh. Does this mean that I have to 'fess up that I am actually a lawyer? (But I don't practice in this area almost at all.) What I would suggest, assuming as I am that you're correct and there's no case law out there regarding the necessity of a retailer retrieving content from end-users, is that Amazon could have pressed the issue by bringing a declaratory judgment action. (That means that Amazon could have proactively chosen to make the courts decide this issue, without waiting to be sued.)

The other side of this coin is that, almost regardless of who the ultimate rights holder is here, Amazon is almost certain to have greater resources to bring to bear in a suit. It either could have waited for a suit that, given this probably disparity in arsenal size, was unlikely ever to be filed. Or it could have taken the bull by the horns or the horse by the reins or whatever, and initiated litigation on its own. Indeed, I'm not quite sure why you would doubt that Amazon would be interested in litigating this issue, since, again, it's not like it doesn't have the money! And, further, it's effing great PR to be "standing up for their customers" or whatever.

Surely a helluva lot better PR than what they're getting now!

I hope Amazon gets called out onto the carpet for this one. This is a real bonehead move.

bustedchain

@CarynGalolahere: I think that falls under Fair Use for educational purposes:

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

@uchendunwachukwu: Nope. It's unfair to punish the customer. There is no ethical explaination for the deletion, they sold the book. Period, if the publisher didn't have the rights, they shouldn't have been selling it. Remote deletion is NOT an option for them without the consent of the Kindle owner, even if it is mentioned in their ELUA. It's not right, period.

Improve their screening process, don't punish the user.

@leaderbuilder: very well put sir.

the_wiggle

@Walljasper: time to emigrate. but where. . . ?

the_wiggle

@DorothyMantooth: First let me be clear: IANAL (I am not a lawyer) or a law student or a paralegal or anything related to the legal profession. The only reason I know what I do regarding the DMCA and Safe Harbor is because I followed the issue when it was affecting YouTube a few years back. I'm just trying to connect the dots as best I can.

Having said that, to my knowledge the specific question of whether "removing content" extends to the end-user's device has never been tested in court, and that's where it will need to be answered. The problem is, Amazon (or a similar digital content distributor) would have to have left the content on people's devices, waited for legal action on it, and fought that fight in court for the precedent to be set. I highly doubt Amazon is interested in doing that.

Okay, I love reading books on my computer. I even like reading them on the iPhone(and I have both of those "removed books" on 2 apps!).

But for f*cks sake, I don't understand this Kindle. It's big, it is (in my opinion) ugly, expensive, and now, you don't even know if the stuff you're buying isn't gonna dissapear on your next trip to the crapper.

So, no, the Kindle will never have a place in my white porcelian heaven.

P.S. I hear they are rubberized in the back to avoid tumbling into and (inevitably) mixing into whatever my bowels throw out in the crapper. Good move, Amazon, good move.

P.P.S. And with real books, you can actually use them for emergency "oh-shit-I-forgot-to-buy-toilet-paper........." wipes! Or, alternatively, as an especially mean way to show your feelings to the author. I'm looking at you, paperback "Twilight" with such soft, soft paper that oh so well wipes my ass, everytime, and every day. And I'm not even past 200 pages.

Bigby

@Lance eagles3strong: If you ask software companies and content providers, a correctly worded EULA can make anything legal.

tnt-tek

Screw Amazon, this was all the goverments doing. They think we know to much.