Amazon Remotely Deleting Books From Kindle

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

belardo

Distinguished
Nov 23, 2008
1,143
0
19,230
[citation][nom]jhaws1001[/nom]I don't like the idea that Amazon has the ABILITY to delete the book from the device in the first place. That "feature" alone dissuades me from wanting to purchase one. I guess I'll stick with the little screen on my iphone. Can Apple remotely remove my apps too?[/citation]

Because the iPhone connects to iTunes which is updated (weekly it seems) by Apple - it is possible for Apple to do ANYTHING to your phone. All it would be is a command. "Delete ***.***" - whatever. Same for Windows too. With Linux, its not possible because its open source - and devs / users would know about it. (Not being PRO Linux, just a fact)

what happens if a government decided to ban a book as offensive? Would Amazon comply with the new ban and pull the book from your library?

To a degree, the govt. can do that... and worse. MS has the right to edit or delete anything off your computer. Read the EULA. So lets say the Govt. demanded to have access to their servers and send out a KILL command for Windows PCs to delete certain files.

Think about that as your Vista/XP box does its background updates.
 

mdillenbeck

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2008
283
0
18,930
[citation][nom]ram1009[/nom]I don't know how Amazon's customer agreement reads, however I dont see this as a big deal as long as Amazon notifies the customers involved and refunds ALL monies.[/citation]
There are a few issues.

First, many customers felt like they bought a product and it was stolen. My favorite inaccurate analogy posted that I found basically states this is like Barnes and Noble breaking into your house, takes a book that was illegally distributed off of your shelf, and then left a refund check for your original purchase price on the shelf with a note saying "Sorry, this copy of ______ has been removed from your shelf and a refund issued." In other words, many people who felt they had bought something have learned they actually only paid for the right to borrowing something, and thus felt burglarized. This aspect should have been spelled out clearly and in plain English on the Kindle reader and Kindle book purchase page.

Second, I have also hear of many reports of mark-up annotations being deleted. Once person was using "Animal Farm" for a summer course, and all their notes for their final paper were deleted when the purchase was revoked. So while Amazon has the right to delete the licensed media, I wonder if their license covers the right to delete and user-generated markup also. If you think failing due to a book recall on Amazon doesn't have lasting consequences, remember that grades in your academic record are the same as your criminal record - permanent.

Thus the outrage is over ownership and what the purchase actually covers. The laws in the US have been rather unclear, usually being based off of print-based media laws that are fitted to this new electronic media.
 

joseph85

Distinguished
Sep 5, 2006
12
0
18,560
[citation][nom]Ramar[/nom]Sorry for the double-post, but after reading the article, owners were refunded. The publisher pulled the book, not Amazon. So not quite so creepy.[/citation]
That's not the point.
 
G

Guest

Guest
It doesnt matter if they have the legal right to delete books or not. Thats not what is shocking people/pissing them off.

Its the fact that they CAN and WILL delete books from yoru library. This is the problem. The fact they even have the ability, and not only have the ability but are cmopletely willing to use it.

This is just bad bad mojo. Even if its only used to delete a kiddie porn book(which i would support but tahts about it), the fact it can be used to censor books at will is the big problem.

Books, knowledge, history should be sacrosanct. The ability to mod it at will leads down a very very dark path.
 

oldscotch

Distinguished
May 28, 2007
24
0
18,560
As far as the user was concerned, they were legal purchases. That Amazon acquired them illegally is not the fault of the purchaser.

The Kindle always seemed an overpriced gadget to me regardless. No way am I buying one now.
 

p00dl3_h3r0

Distinguished
May 13, 2005
38
0
18,580
After working at Barnes and Noble for a year, and being there when the Kindle made a huge christmas splash, I find this quite funny. Often I would get customers who would complain about either our prices or in store availability and simply say,"Fine, i've always ,liked Amazon better anyway." Some people even had the gall to ask whre they could buy a Kindle. Now my response is going to be either:

1. Aisle 4, next to Newspeak for dummies.
2. We don't sell it, but we do have a brief introduction to it called "Fahrenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury.

Smooth move Amazon.
 

numbersix

Distinguished
Jul 19, 2009
1
0
18,510
It never ceases to amaze me how naive technology enthusiasts are. Incorporating devices and systems like Kindle into your ecosystems allows others to monitor, adjudicate and execute upon you. This "1984" event is the most obvious, visible, and instructive of this capability and power.

They 'decide'; others are aware; control is not totally up to you. Reading too slowly? Having trouble with big words? Tastes are a bit suspect? Not finishing what you start? ... Many will want to know. Is this what you desire for your future? Your children's future? Talk about a slippery slope.

Amazon and AT&T have a bird's eye view of who you are by your choices you let them participate in. Where do you read and when. How many of what types of books, or newspapers, or magazines. What inspires you? What thoughts link with others. You let them know... And you pay cash to them for it.

We, the people must demand a Digtial Bill Of Rights, before the slope gets too steep, slippery and irreversible.
 

jaybus

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2006
31
0
18,580
You know what's ironic? That "1984" is still under copyright 60 years after publication, with another 35 years to go. While, at the same time, the current administration wants to lower property rights of new drugs to 12 years, at which time generic companies can make and sell the drug royalty free. Since it will be nearly impossible to recoup their R&D expenses, most will reduce or just stop R&D. These protection limits are extremely unfair in both cases. There is no need for an author's great grandchildren to be protected. Anyone working in the publishing house 60 years ago is likely not in need of any property rights. On the other hand, who is going to design new medicines if they can't profit from it? There is a need for property rights, but the rights have been distorted out of any semblance of fairness.
 

Milleman

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2006
82
0
18,580
They just extended the Music Industry's rights to 70 years. Why is the rights regarding music more important than rights for the medical companies?
 

belardo

Distinguished
Nov 23, 2008
1,143
0
19,230
Good one MDillenbeck. Its kind of violation of trust... the principle of the matter.

Many many years ago, I was selling "some" Laser Discs for an ex-business and I get a %. A friend had some of these over the weekend (during transport) and decided he would KEEP some of these. He PAID for the ones he wanted. Thing is, I hadn't told him which ones where for sale and that some of those I had ear-marked for myself to own or already bought them. He lived 2 blocks away, he could have borrowed them. And later, if HE *ASKED* me if he could buy them later, I would have said YES to most of them. Pissed me off and ended the friendship.

Or one day, I was trying to get some of my equipment from a friend, who was asleep(I gathered) For fun, I stuck my house key into his lock.. and IT WORKED! I YELLED "HELLO!" from the open door... nothing. I shut the door, locked it and left. Told him about the key, etc. Funny. It wasn't my right to enter his home.
 

nekatreven

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2007
246
0
18,830
[citation][nom]RicardoK[/nom]This is the proof that no one really cares about things you BUY!! If you bought the ebook than you can still have it. Oh, I don't want anyone to have my printed book, let's call the police and search every single house for a copy of the book and burn it (a little bit nazi for you? ) So, the big brother is taking a different approach. Instead of the governments it's companies. Congratulations America. This is the so called FREEDOM..[/citation]

No you fool...the "so called" FREEDOM is our ability to bitch about it as much as we want and tell them what idiots they are and not get imprisoned or executed for not agreeing with said governments and or companies. Really dude, wake up.
 

fulle

Distinguished
May 31, 2008
391
0
18,930
[citation][nom]nekatreven[/nom]No you fool...the "so called" FREEDOM is our ability to bitch about it as much as we want and tell them what idiots they are and not get imprisoned or executed for not agreeing with said governments and or companies. Really dude, wake up.[/citation]

Apparently, you haven't read the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Wake up dude, the thought Police are already knocking.
 
G

Guest

Guest
no joke, I was seriously about to buy either a sony e-reader or the kindle. Guess which one I will be choosing now?
 

nekatreven

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2007
246
0
18,830
[citation][nom]fulle[/nom]Apparently, you haven't read the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Wake up dude, the thought Police are already knocking.[/citation]

Apparently, you don't understand how writing laws works. That crap never became law. After a 400+ to 6 smashing success vote in the House someone actually stopped to read the bill and everyone discovered what it was really about. The bill's own author has long since turned a 180 and vowed to kill the bill. The bill died in the Senate having never been voted on. The backlash also killed the NAO, which started a means to manage disaster relief via satellite imaging and turned into an oversight-free way to take satellite pictures of whatever the hell the government felt like.

Senators and Reps don't read bills...dude...aides do, and they summarize. Votes don't tell the story and there are a million ways to kill a bill once folks realize the wool is being pulled. So don't spout off unless you know what the hell you're talking about.
 

nekatreven

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2007
246
0
18,830
and...AND...more often then not some half brained extremist lobbyist from an interest group wrote the law...NOT the legislator. They don't always read them THEN either. I'd bet in this case the "author" copied and pasted and introduced the bill to return a favor without reading the damned thing...and THAT'S why the 180 turn later on. Cause SHE didn't know what it was about EITHER.

effing moron. I swear.
 

cg49me

Distinguished
May 3, 2008
1
0
18,510
Guess I'll take the unpopular vote here...

I've got a Kindle, received it as a gift about six months ago. I'm absolutely in love with it. As far as how expensive they are, you're paying for the convenience of being able to get the book you want instantly straight from the device (no need to get on a computer, you can do everything from the Kindle - in fact, it's easier to do so), and that one time charge covers the lifetime of unlimited internet usage (granted it's not going to play any flash games, but for general browsing it works fine).

I'm also an opponent of all things DRM. It's frustrating to have games that use it (buying Spore was a leap for me), and I only buy my music in physical format.

So the fact that this happens sucks, but it's not Amazon's fault. They just had to take the fall since it's their device that was affected. If you really want to yell at someone, find the Joe Schmoe that approved those versions of the books for distrobution on the device in the first place. At the very least, those who lost the book got a refund.

Again, I think the Kindle is an excellent device. If you're an avid reader, it's great. The prices of books on it are cheaper than the print versions, plus you don't have to pay shipping. So what if it's another way for Captain Corporate to monitor you? If you're really complaining about that, what the hell are you doing on the internet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.