Great news: Amazon remotely deleting books from users’ Kindles
posted at 4:38 pm on July 18, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Most of you will have already read about this at InstaGlenn or elsewhere but I want to use our little platform here to help make the publicity as painful as possible so that they’ll never do it again. I was set to splurge on the DX for my mom’s birthday; now I’m leaning towards Broadway tickets. If there’s a more sensational example in recent years of a company with an up-and-coming product shooting itself in the foot, I’d like to know what it is.
The books that ended up being flushed down the memory hole by Big Brother Bezos, incidentally? “Animal Farm” and “1984.”
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…
Justin Gawronski, a 17-year-old from the Detroit area, was reading “1984” on his Kindle for a summer assignment and lost all his notes and annotations when the file vanished. “They didn’t just take a book back, they stole my work,” he said.
Property law experts are using this as an object lesson on the difference between ownership rights and digital licenses, but how relevant is that in this case really? Quote:
Amazon’s published terms of service agreement for the Kindle does not appear to give the company the right to delete purchases after they have been made. It says Amazon grants customers the right to keep a “permanent copy of the applicable digital content.”
The counterargument, per Instapundit’s wife, is that Amazon’s actually protecting property rights by yanking stuff that violates copyright out of people’s hands. Technically true, but commercial law has traditionally let purchasers of stolen goods keep them so long as they made the purchase in “good faith.” Click here and scroll down for a legal explanation of the term or see, e.g., sections 1-201(9) and 2-403 of the Uniform Commercial Code. If the holder of the Orwell copyright wants justice, by all means let him sue Amazon and the unlicensed publisher of the digital books for damages. That’s the surest way to get Bezos and company to more closely police the copyright status of books being sold in their Kindle store. Why they’re not already doing that is frankly unfathomable to me, but doubly unfathomable is them reaching into your virtual bookshelf to forcibly repurchase a book you’ve already bought. Exit question: Is this a dealbreaker for would-be Kindle purchasers?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Can you comment on your HA app? Kindle2 has a keypad, but I can’t read/or comment. Some sites HA links to, I can read their comments.
TN Mom on July 18, 2009 at 5:53 PM
Makes sense to me. Animal Farm ≅ 1984 ≅ Obamatopia.
petefrt on July 18, 2009 at 5:54 PM
When Amazon recalls the Presidential election, I’ll buy stock.
corona on July 18, 2009 at 5:54 PM
No offense AP, but you’re totally wrong on the law here. First, under the UCC there is a distinction between stolen goods and good obtained through fraud – a good faith purchaser can get good title (gets to keep) to the latter, but gets only void title (has to give up) to the former. That’s even assuming section 2-403 would apply in the copyright context, which it wouldn’t.
The bigger problem with applying the UCC here though, is that it (specifically section 2, which you are referring to) only applies to sales of goods. The point made by Glenn’s wife is that you are not in any way buying a ‘book’ when you purchase items to read on your Kindle; all you are purchasing is a license to certain rights related to a book. That license is extremely limited and basically means that you can only read your ‘book’ when and how Amazon and the publishers say you can.
From a legal standpoint, Amazon had every right to do what it did. From a practical and customer-relations standpoint, it was amazingly stupid. The real problem, though, is that 99.99% of the people purchasing these arbitrary licenses — whether for ebooks, software, downloaded music, whatever — don’t realize what they are buying. If people knew that they were not getting what they thought they were (i.e., not getting a book, etc., but only a limited right to view it), the market would force companies to get rid of these ridiculous, anti-consumer licenses.
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 5:58 PM
AP, if you buy your mom the Kindle, be sure to get a cover for it. Mine opens like a ‘book’ and they come in lots of colors; around $40.
My daughter reads it at the pool, she puts it in a ziplock bag!
TN Mom on July 18, 2009 at 5:59 PM
Jeez, this makes me feel like an idiot when I read stuff like this.
It occurs to me that the technology must exist for someone to go into any device someone has( computer, iphone, PDA, whatever)and look at files, edit, or delete them at will. Am I just being paranoid here? If everything is digital in the future, how can you be sure it is never altered?
Come to think of it, wasn’t that the very premise of “Animal Farm” The writing on the wall of the barn kept changing, but the animal’s never quite caught on.
redshirt on July 18, 2009 at 6:00 PM
Hey Kids! Really cool widget, “GONE!”
http://www.clearspring.com/widgets/4974d21ab04fa9e2?p=-
Archimedes on July 18, 2009 at 6:02 PM
I have a Sony PRS-700. It rocks.
rollthedice on July 18, 2009 at 6:05 PM
Did Amazon physically change the state of any memory on the person’s actual Kindle device? If they did, then they infringed on private property. If I lend you a book (not sell, but lend) and you refuse to return it to me, I am not allowed to break into your house to get it. Even if you invite me in to your house, I believe that I am not allowed to just grab it and run – though it is my property. Am I going astray somewhere?
progressoverpeace on July 18, 2009 at 6:07 PM
ROFL!! Thankfully I had just swallowed that last sip of coffee before I read that!
Jim708 on July 18, 2009 at 6:07 PM
I have the Kindle App on my iPhone. I enjoy it mostly because when I’m stuck somewhere, I can pull it up and read a book without having to bring said book along. If given the opportunity to buy textbooks/books for classes, though, I’d still buy the hard copy. Digital media can corrupt, my 3 lb Chemistry book can’t.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 6:08 PM
You can digitally lock files, so that you would be able to know if they were tampered with, in any way.
These are the hashes you see with some downloads that are provided to make sure that they are the real download files and not some altered one. These will work until someone breaks the hashing programs or until computing power overtakes them (both a good ways off, most likely).
progressoverpeace on July 18, 2009 at 6:11 PM
The left’s did it for W. so its nice to be able to do it for Obama. Time flies when you are having fun, no?
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 6:11 PM
I’m not sure but we could ask OJ.
Oldnuke on July 18, 2009 at 6:12 PM
In that case, just make sure the glove doesn’t fit.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 6:13 PM
I mentioned that on the last page (the Vegas OJ). It was the first thing that came to my mind.
progressoverpeace on July 18, 2009 at 6:14 PM
Excellent. Thanks.
And the trouble is, the longer they’re allowed to perpetrate this practice, the harder it will be to clean it up.
petefrt on July 18, 2009 at 6:16 PM
Archimedes on July 18, 2009 at 6:02 PM
The left’s did it for W. so its nice to be able to do it for Obama. Time flies when you are having fun, no?
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 6:11 PM
What ever helps! But the party I throw when the Obamanable Snowman is shown the door, now that’s gonna be fun!
Archimedes on July 18, 2009 at 6:16 PM
I don’t really think that would apply here. You buy the Kindle with the understanding that it’s a two way connection. I’m not a lawyer by any means but I’m betting that Amazon has a bucket full of ‘em that what they did was one hundred percent legal. Smart, now that’s another matter.
Oldnuke on July 18, 2009 at 6:21 PM
“blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 5:40 PM”
most cougars aren’t hackers …
/jus’ sayin’ …
Buckaroo on July 18, 2009 at 5:41 PM
And that is precisely why I don’t want gps
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Ah…but cougars have the money to hire hackers…
ladyingray on July 18, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Got it. On my blog now. Thanks.
petefrt on July 18, 2009 at 6:24 PM
I was going to buy a DX last month to help me begin replacing the volumes of large research and reference materials I use daily, but since finding out the new Kindles don’t have a memory card function for easy backup (the first version did) I decided to wait and see if Amazon would return that function to an upcoming version of the Kindle. However late last month I was on a flight back from Virginia and one of the other passengers had the new, regular-sized, Kindle and the bug hit me.
I had put money aside to purchase a DX at the beginning of next month, but after reading this that plan is now on permanent hold. It wasn’t the fact that Amazon had to protect a copyright they screwed up, but reading about the man who lost all of his notes and annotations just completely ruined this product for me. I can’t afford to loose notes on programming materials or design volumes at a whim, and even if Amazon addresses this issue in a future version of their terms of use agreement I still won’t buy one, not until they disable that ridiculous two way connection they have with the Kindle.
Purchases should always be one way.
smfoushee on July 18, 2009 at 6:24 PM
If you turn on and use a Kindle, thereby agreeing to the terms of use that pop up but no one actually bothers reading, you are agreeing
In other words, you bought a bunch of silicon, wires, and plastic. That is all you bought. Anything useful it does is contingent on a license from Amazon:
Read that quote again.
You have to agree to the license agreement the first time you turn your Kindle on in order to use it, and what you are agreeing to is that you can only use it at Amazon’s whim.
That’s what makes this different from your example. A license is just a limited right to do something. In legal jargon, when you loan me a book you are granting me a license to take it with me and read it, and eventually give it back. To make this analogous to the Kindle, before you lend me that book you would have to make me sign an license agreement in which I agree that you can come and collect your book at any time you want, even if it means breaking into my house. If I sign that paper, then I can’t complain if you break into my house and take the book back.
That is exactly what I mean when I said that people don’t realize what they are getting when they ‘buy’ digital content of any sort, and that if they did know this license model would eventually disappear. It is completely counter-intuitive and totally ridiculous, but it’s perfectly legal.
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Can you comment on your HA app? Kindle2 has a keypad, but I can’t read/or comment. Some sites HA links to, I can read their comments.
TN Mom on July 18, 2009 at 5:53 PM
No app
Internet page
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 6:26 PM
Okay. thanks. If it’s in the contract, then I have no problem with it.
progressoverpeace on July 18, 2009 at 6:31 PM
They’ve been doing it for 20 years now, give or take.
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 6:34 PM
First of all, if people are upset because Amazon deleted a version that they shouldn’t have been selling, the people need to grow up and get over it. For goodness sakes, they were fully reimbursed.
2nd, with all due offense, they were idiots for purchasing those books in the first place when you can get them all over the ‘net for free, including at legit sites like Gutenberg. I get all sorts of free books for my Kindle that way. No way am I paying for something older like that.
William Teach on July 18, 2009 at 6:34 PM
Charles Johnson at LGF has been pushing the Kindel for a while. I made a joke about it and he banned me. Very touchy for some reason.
RobCon on July 18, 2009 at 6:34 PM
I am old school when i read…I want a book made of paper not an electronic gadget. No disrespect to those who enjoy reading on a digital device, just the way i am hardwired. But as far as Amazon and the Kindle not even on my radar…I buy my digital music downloads from Itunes with gift cards and even those are rare as i prefer to have a physical item for my purchases
JKotthoff on July 18, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Write it. Don’t be a beta.
DarkCurrent on July 18, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Don’t worry, RoboCon, Excitable Chuckie bans people for anything that mildly disagrees with his Official Position.
I prefer paper first, too, JK. But, a Kindle is nice for those books you want to buy but do not want spend the $$ on. I use mine a lot for non-fiction, and, it is nice that you can read the first chapter or so for free, to see if it sucks.
William Teach on July 18, 2009 at 6:39 PM
I don’t actually know it’s in the contract, since I don’t have a Kindle and never read it. That said Kindle is a wireless application that doesn’t need a computer to download online content. That means you’ve got to be able to access them and they’ve got to access your device. That means it’s two way just the way it works. The Sony that I have has no wireless function I have to use the internet to download the books. They come onto my computer and I put them into my bookreader or on a digital media card or both. Sony could maybe access my computer but they damn sure can’t access an SD card laying on my desk.
Oldnuke on July 18, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Well,maybe their wooried about the environment,and don’t
want to mess with the old book burnings of the German era,
and piss off the enviromental wackos!!
So they’ve gone high tech,in deletion,and maybe not!(Snark)
canopfor on July 18, 2009 at 6:41 PM
aha. mommie issues. not a surprise.
I_C on July 18, 2009 at 6:42 PM
You do realize that the two books in question are still in copyright in the U.S. don’t you? I don’t think they are available from PG either. As pointed out by a couple of other people they are out of copyright in Australia and Canada and can be downloaded from sites there, but it’s illegal to download them for free here in the U.S.
Oldnuke on July 18, 2009 at 6:44 PM
DarkCurrent on July 18, 2009 at 6:38 PM
I don’t know that stuff!
In high school I was busy playing music in front of girls
not yelling at my mom for meatloaf while coding in ms dos
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 6:48 PM
You can get a lot of great old books that way, but if you’re downloading 1984 or Animal Farm in the U.S., you’re breaking copyright law. The ever-increasing copyright term in the U.S. is presently life plus 70 years. Since George Orwell died in 1950, we’ve got 11 years to go until his books enter the public domain. That said, Gutenberg Australia (where the term is life+50) has the books available for download. But just because it is available doesn’t make it “legit.”
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 6:50 PM
But wait… In other news….
AP has a Mom?
Like a human one and everything?
wow……..
Diogenes of Sinope on July 18, 2009 at 6:50 PM
http://gutenberg.net.au/plusfifty-n-z.html#orwell
& many other decent books…..
albertpale on July 18, 2009 at 6:50 PM
What were the girls busy doing?
Oldnuke on July 18, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Oldnuke on July 18, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Drooling over the guitarist.
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 6:54 PM
but yes, of course, Amazon — who would have thought, such a decent bookseller, and now this. Not funny.
albertpale on July 18, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Pathetic. Do you have any manly skills at all?
DarkCurrent on July 18, 2009 at 6:55 PM
Yeah, I understand that it only applies to goods. I’m just saying that the principle is analogous: It would apply to real-world books, so there’s an argument that it should apply to eBooks too. And as I noted in the post, the license argument isn’t nearly as clear as one might think given Amazon’s terms of service. It says you’re entitled to a permanent copy. They lied.
Allahpundit on July 18, 2009 at 6:56 PM
Were you the drummer?
I kid!
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 6:56 PM
Woah, redacted by Amazon.
- The Cat
MirCat on July 18, 2009 at 6:59 PM
I bet they were drooling over the yummy drummer!! :p
ladyingray on July 18, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Thanks, added it, can’t wait till it reads all zeros
conservnut on July 18, 2009 at 7:03 PM
DarkCurrent on July 18, 2009 at 6:55 PM
Besides a high Words Per Minute Rate and tying my shoe with one hand, sadly, no.
zerosheep on July 18, 2009
girls don’t look at drummers until they play
guitarists are always better looking
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Interesting that they also mentioned a book by Ayn Rand was deleted. I’m guessing “Atlas Shrugged.”
iurockhead on July 18, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Allahpundit on July 18, 2009 at 6:56 PM
May I suggest Mama Mia for broadway tickets for mum
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Funny name “kindle”. Reminds me of kindling, the material for starting a fire, as in burning books
Maybe they should call it a swindle.
Geochelone on July 18, 2009 at 7:05 PM
According to the TOS, you are entitled to a permanent copy . . . but “Amazon reserves the right to modify, suspend, or discontinue the Service at any time, and Amazon will not be liable to you should it exercise such right.”
Even apart from “the Service” as a whole, the section about keeping a permanent copy specifies “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.”
The language of the TOS is so slanted in Amazon’s favor, it is hard for me to even imagine a scenario under which they could violate it (as long as the refund money if they revoke a license). In fairness to Amazon, they’re just taking advantage of the current state of the law with regard to these sort of take-it-or-leave-it ‘click-wrap’ license agreements. Every bit of software you ‘own,’ along with any sort of digital content you have ever downloaded, has just the same sort of ridiculous license.
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Haha!Once upon a time, my dad was a drummer in a band. That’s how he got my mom.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 7:06 PM
Mama Mia was ruined for me because some friends of mine (girls) played the soundtrack nonstop for a 3 hour drive up to Chicago. I thought I’d lose my mind.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 7:08 PM
AP is right I think, they did promise a permanent copy. Unless they provide a properly licensed free copy in return they are in trouble.
conservnut on July 18, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Yes.
The_Real_JeffS on July 18, 2009 at 7:11 PM
that my friend
is fcking TORTURE
you’re a better man than I for sitting through it
I wrote mama Mia here and immediately the song was stuck
I can only imagine how you suffered
blatantblue on July 18, 2009 at 7:12 PM
That’s what stinks about this whole thing. Curious that these books in particular have been deleted.
conservnut on July 18, 2009 at 7:13 PM
LOL. Thanks. I now use Abba and Mama Mia music in place of syrup of ipecac.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Of course it is. Had read that they had your files’ records there, along w/ the ability to track/delete/do whatever the h*** they wanted to with them.
THIS is why I didn’t buy a Kindle. I have no books that I’m ashamed of but still – NO ONE but NO ONE has the right to know about and keep track of what I choose to read/listen to/etc.
What happened to people valuing their own privacy in this country?
inviolet on July 18, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Hmm….what’s that word that describes this situation…. oh! “Irony”.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 7:15 PM
There ya go…drummers are yummy…
ladyingray on July 18, 2009 at 7:21 PM
I like toys as much as the next dude, but the Kindle and it’s predecessors never interested me. I read actual books. And they can’t be deleted once you have it.
JetBoy on July 18, 2009 at 7:22 PM
I was pretty close to buying a Kindle, but this is a definite deal breaker for me.
JDwinston on July 18, 2009 at 7:24 PM
You gotta be kidding. Got a link for that? If Atlas Shrugged, or even Fountainhead was deleted along with 1984 and Animal Farm, it’s more of a “coincidence” than I can buy.
petefrt on July 18, 2009 at 7:26 PM
And even if you bought that “coincidence”, they’d just take it away from you and return your money, anyway :)
progressoverpeace on July 18, 2009 at 7:28 PM
You should have been more afraid of losing your heterosexuality. :)
AaronGuzman on July 18, 2009 at 7:31 PM
I’m really feeling sorry for the boy who lost his notes.
Another point: could the government subpoena Amazon to see what books you downloaded? I can’t remember whether they can get a warrant for bookstore and library records or not.
As for the question, I would not buy a Kindle now. Anything they change can be changed back.
goddessoftheclassroom on July 18, 2009 at 7:33 PM
Oh, yeah. Kindles that had a habit of cracking, Amazon wanted a fee of 200 bucks to fix it.
JetBoy on July 18, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Yep, I was actually entertaining the thought of getting one for myself because I love to read and this is much cheaper than buying books. Not now!
Another question, will the folks that make Kindle sue Amazon for loss of sales after this fiasco?
conservnut on July 18, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Per AP’s question — yeah, this is a deal breaker for me, there is no way I would buy a Kindle after hearing this.
AZfederalist on July 18, 2009 at 7:38 PM
You know, that thought never occurred to me. Ok, I will never buy a Kindle. But how much longer do you think before printed books are no longer available? When digital is the preferred medium? Like cassettes replacing LP’s and CD’s replacing cassettes and downloadable music replacing CD’s?
conservnut on July 18, 2009 at 7:43 PM
There’s nothing wrong with digital media. it’s the cr@p with digital rights management that is the problem. Digital text that you keep as your own normal files are just fine.
progressoverpeace on July 18, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Not to beat a dead horse, AP, but you really ought to change the UCC part of the post. Even if you think the UCC is analogous, this statement is false:
Theft gives only void title, and no valid title can pass to subsequent purchasers regardless of their good-faith status. If the seller has voidable title, on the other hand — such as you get through fraud and the other ways listed in s. 2-403(1) — then the good faith purchaser can take good title.
Sorry to wax pedantic, but this is something of a pet peeve of mine (especially when courts get it wrong).
zerosheep on July 18, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Yes. And I will think twice before I purchase anything from Amazon.
Zorro on July 18, 2009 at 7:52 PM
I’ve never gotten the appeal of these Kindle things. Nothing will ever be able to replace holding the book, the sound of flipping pages, the smell of it (I would wear New Book Smell perfume). It just seems like it’d be similar to reading manga online…which I also hate, but have to do.
Emily M. on July 18, 2009 at 7:54 PM
I still love books. I can’t even begin to imagine a world without them.
No Kindle for me. Not now. Perhaps not ever.
myrenovations on July 18, 2009 at 7:55 PM
I’m going to miss music and book stores when they disappear in the next decade or so (except for those distant Ye Olde Bookshoppes, which will be made nonexistent when the government ordains that all remaining paper must be composted; the black market for used books will dwindle as the last holdouts will reluctantly convert to utilizing holographic/aural media).
CO2 Producer on July 18, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Interesting that they also mentioned a book by Ayn Rand was deleted. I’m guessing “Atlas Shrugged.”
iurockhead on July 18, 2009 at 7:03 PM
In keeping with the Randian spirit of all things capitalist and being a member of ARI, the Institute holds copywrite to all her intellectual content in a vice. That said, I cannot help but be suspicious of it being “just a coincidence” that the titles/authors being “disappeared” down the rabbit hole being of a anti-authoritarian bent. I’m just funny that way.
In principle Idon’t approve of Amamzon’s actions, it sucks.
I might rest a tad easier if say it happened also to authors of contrary veiws, anyone hear that to be the case?
If not, this is starting to mesh too closely with what these books warned about for comfort! I have detected an authoritarian strain running through this administration and it’s many supporters/minions from day one. and I do not like it one bit!
Archimedes on July 18, 2009 at 8:02 PM
(I would wear New Book Smell Perfume)
Emily M. on July,2009 at 7:54PM.
Emily M.:
Could be interesting me thinks!haha.
HilRods,”It Takes a Village”,I would surmise,that it would be an alluring reek,specifically worn by Liberals!
Ann Coulters book,”Godless”,could be an intertesting aroma,
but,I’m not sure!:)
canopfor on July 18, 2009 at 8:03 PM
No, no, no. The New Book Smell is so wonderful it encompasses all new books – even the ones with stanky content.
Emily M. on July 18, 2009 at 8:05 PM
Sure, it’s the trend for property nowadays. You’re free to buy it, you can own it, and you can even pay taxes on it, but we’ll tell you how you can (and cannot) use it.
petefrt on July 18, 2009 at 8:06 PM
It is for this one.
Buford on July 18, 2009 at 8:18 PM
the ones with stanky content.
Emily M.on July 18,2009 at 8:05PM.
Emily M.: Gotcha,but it would be a tad funny tho,like,
peeeee you,your reading a Julie Childs Cookbook,
it reeks of cookies,no wait,duck maybe!!hehe:)
canopfor on July 18, 2009 at 8:20 PM
Emilee, dat allooring scent of mine joo smell, madame—eet eez ze “Musc de Vieux Livre.” Eet eez très sexy, no?
CO2 Producer on July 18, 2009 at 8:26 PM
How is this a dealbreaker if they say they won’t do it again?
Frankly, if I had written something and saw someone uploaded a pirated version for sale on Amazon (and received 30% of the retail price just for uploading it) I’d support Amazon deep-sixing the distribution of it. That’s basically what happened here.
JohnTant on July 18, 2009 at 8:31 PM
When you bottle the perfume, let me know. I agree wholeheartedly. I won’t buy used books just so I am the first to crack the spine.
sherry on July 18, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Not a dealbreaker, but a very interesting ‘penumbra’ that the digital realm has exposed.
Amazon needs to be as apologetic as hell, and make some sound policy decisions to get its act together.
This is a fairly new legal frontier. I’m not surprised there’s a few black eyes and eggy faces ;)
LimeyGeek on July 18, 2009 at 8:40 PM
I’ve never understood the appeal either. I sit in front of a computer much of the day. Reading is an indulgence that helps me get out of reality. Why on earth would I want to introduce yet another glowing screen to my life?
highhopes on July 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM
If you pay for your books with a card, there’s a theoretical database of your reading habits right there.
It’s amazing the footprints we can leave in the virtual realm.
LimeyGeek on July 18, 2009 at 8:43 PM
The reason Kindle is so cool is that it *isn’t* a glowing screen burning your retinas away. It’s “e-ink” a form of lcd that remains when the power is off – that’s why Kindle batteries last so long.
My stumbling block is the price point of Kindle. $150 and I’m a buyer.
LimeyGeek on July 18, 2009 at 8:45 PM
Near as I can tell, besides reaching out and erasing stuff, Amazon’s biggest sin was not having control over what can get sent out to its subscribers. In this litigious society, that’s absurd.
Oh! And for the record, any 17-year-old who claims he lost all sorts of notes and annotations on a summer reading assignment is using the opportunity to pull the 21st century version of “the dog ate my homework.” Sorry Justin, I just don’t buy your excuses.
highhopes on July 18, 2009 at 8:47 PM
I’ve seen them and I guess I used the term “glowing screen” incorrectly. For my job I read dense text on-line quite a bit. I get most of my news from on-line websites. I usually read my e-mail through my cell phone.
Reading (other than what I do for work) is an escape. For me, it isn’t cool to have yet another electronic device in my life. Holding a book instead of a device is as important as the words on the page.
P.S. I reserve the right to change my tune when I start in on my PhD next year.
highhopes on July 18, 2009 at 8:52 PM
I kind of agree. I’ve had my Kindle for quite some time and while the ability to annotate and take notes is theoretically nice, the limitations of the e-ink display and the onerous thumb-thumb typing makes the actual doing of it more trouble than its worth.
Just from my experience, I have a hard time believing a serious student would make exclusive use of this function on the Kindle.
JohnTant on July 18, 2009 at 8:55 PM
You’re exactly right. Which is why I do buy some books with a card, but I use different websites on purpose, and more to the point I buy a lot of my books at thrift shops or bookstores – in cash – it’s amazing how many classics and current books you can get.
I don’t know – I just have this thing about people being able to see an easily compiled/observed virtual database about me. It’s not that I imagine I’m being observed individually, but rather that there’s some big aggregate marketing scheme I don’t feel like being part of, or, alternatively, something the govt can get hold of in aggregate if by any chance my heavily leaning conservative reading habits end up on some aggregate database.
And re: that last point, if I sound like I don’t trust a liberal who’s got power to respect people’s privacy if I ever do any thing to p*** off just the right person, whether it’s govt or otherwise, you are correct. The model respecting of privacy of people like Joe the Plumber are very good teachers for the rest of us.
inviolet on July 18, 2009 at 8:56 PM
= how many classics and current books you can get at a thrift store like Goodwill
inviolet on July 18, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Are you a chiropractor?
whitetop on July 18, 2009 at 8:58 PM
LOL!
Cindy Munford on July 18, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Hey…I’m with you all the way re privacy issues pal ;)
I try to do as much barter/cash business as I can.
LimeyGeek on July 18, 2009 at 9:06 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »