Another example of how ridiculous things are here in the U.S. A kid loses his notes and gets $150,000 for it. Fine! I'm going to sue drivers that drive slowly in front of me that cause me to be late for work. If I get fired I'll want an additional $500,000 in "lost wages".
- Status
Hope Slayer
Distinguished
- Feb 29, 2008
- 31
- 0
- 18,580
What this boils down to is nothing more then a new case law precident so that in the future software companies who subvert on the terms of their own EULA can be held liable for damages.
I'm not familiar with Kindle devices, but I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the owners manual or during a download purchase a EULA is show, just like when you purchase something from iTunes. Within those EULA's is usually a line or paragraph that use of the material once purchased is that of the consumers discretion so long as it is not reproduce or distributed ect, but that the intellectual and creative rights still belong to the publisher/author. That being said boils down to while you may not resale it or alter it from it's intended use, no one, not even the creative source has the legal right to deny you or withdraw use of service after purchase. Imagine if a car manufacture tried to reposses vehicles simply because an end dealer sold add on packages that used products they didn't authorize. It happens everyday, but the manufactures can't do squat because the end dealer actually owns the end user rights of the vehicle untill sold to the consumer. When a recall on a vehicle is issued due to manufacturing issues they can't legally make you take your vehicle in to the dealership because even though it may be made by them and carry their logo they don't own it anymore. I hope all that just made sense.
Amazon really did get off easy.
I'm not familiar with Kindle devices, but I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the owners manual or during a download purchase a EULA is show, just like when you purchase something from iTunes. Within those EULA's is usually a line or paragraph that use of the material once purchased is that of the consumers discretion so long as it is not reproduce or distributed ect, but that the intellectual and creative rights still belong to the publisher/author. That being said boils down to while you may not resale it or alter it from it's intended use, no one, not even the creative source has the legal right to deny you or withdraw use of service after purchase. Imagine if a car manufacture tried to reposses vehicles simply because an end dealer sold add on packages that used products they didn't authorize. It happens everyday, but the manufactures can't do squat because the end dealer actually owns the end user rights of the vehicle untill sold to the consumer. When a recall on a vehicle is issued due to manufacturing issues they can't legally make you take your vehicle in to the dealership because even though it may be made by them and carry their logo they don't own it anymore. I hope all that just made sense.
Amazon really did get off easy.
The headline should also read "whose" not "who's".
Who's = "Who is/has/was"
Do these authors even take time to read their own articles before they put them on the site? I mean really it doesn't make your news credible at all when you write articles and just throw them up there. How do I even know these figures are accurate when you cannot even proofread a simple and short article?
Who's = "Who is/has/was"
Do these authors even take time to read their own articles before they put them on the site? I mean really it doesn't make your news credible at all when you write articles and just throw them up there. How do I even know these figures are accurate when you cannot even proofread a simple and short article?
[citation][nom]ssalim[/nom]How do you half of you?[/citation]The difference is, he's not paid to have proper grammar or spelling when releasing comments for the masses to criticize. This actually falls more on the editors who are supposed to catch these mistakes. I'm starting to think Tom's is just an open market for the writers to put whatever dribble they want in the News section even though most of the articles are opinion based Editorials.
ssddx
Glorious
- May 27, 2009
- 5,968
- 2
- 46,060
Perhaps the kid should have had a hard copy of his notes. Shame on amazon, but also shame on him. If we had a blackout would he go after the power company next?
Manos, I think most of us would rather have it working again instead of investing time into a lawsuit.
Honis & ssalim, "you" can refer to more than just one person. ie... "you all." or, it could be a comment directed at each person who reads it.
Manos, I think most of us would rather have it working again instead of investing time into a lawsuit.
Honis & ssalim, "you" can refer to more than just one person. ie... "you all." or, it could be a comment directed at each person who reads it.
[citation][nom]ssddx[/nom]Honis & ssalim, "you" can refer to more than just one person. ie... "you all." or, it could be a comment directed at each person who reads it.[/citation]
He has an extra "you" in his sentence. What he probably meant to write: How do half of you still have jobs.
He has an extra "you" in his sentence. What he probably meant to write: How do half of you still have jobs.
hillarymakesmecry
Distinguished
- Feb 24, 2009
- 293
- 0
- 18,930
I wish someone would delete some of y stuff. You can throw all of my electronic records and history and computers from the last 15 years out the window if you had me a 150k settlement.
"The kid who's Kindle at his homework has successfully sued Amazon for $150,000."
How do you "at your homework?" A grammar or spelling error here & there is somewhat excusable. Grammar errors in every "article" no so much. Errors in the headline; you're fired.
How do you "at your homework?" A grammar or spelling error here & there is somewhat excusable. Grammar errors in every "article" no so much. Errors in the headline; you're fired.
bootleghooch
Distinguished
- Apr 15, 2009
- 24
- 0
- 18,560
This fails to mention probably the biggest answer to most of the gripes I'm hearing.
"The money, after going to the law firm representing the teen, will be donated to charity."
This kid isn't getting anything.
"The money, after going to the law firm representing the teen, will be donated to charity."
This kid isn't getting anything.
[citation][nom]bootleghooch[/nom]This fails to mention probably the biggest answer to most of the gripes I'm hearing."The money, after going to the law firm representing the teen, will be donated to charity."This kid isn't getting anything.[/citation]
???
Wow, what about school?
???
Wow, what about school?
[citation][nom]asjflask[/nom]Another example of how ridiculous things are here in the U.S. A kid loses his notes and gets $150,000 for it. Fine! I'm going to sue drivers that drive slowly in front of me that cause me to be late for work. If I get fired I'll want an additional $500,000 in "lost wages".[/citation]
If your car were just one day gone because Toyota send out hordes of repo men to "recall" you car do to a manufacturing problem you'd be upset too and would want compensation.
With GPS and an Onstar type system it would be that hard to do.
If your car were just one day gone because Toyota send out hordes of repo men to "recall" you car do to a manufacturing problem you'd be upset too and would want compensation.
With GPS and an Onstar type system it would be that hard to do.
nottheking
Distinguished
- Jan 5, 2006
- 311
- 0
- 18,930
I'm betting most of those screaming about the size of the settlement are merely jealous, wishing they could get money easily. (though without having to suffer first, of course) And of course, they also failed to read the whole original article, from which they'd learned that the kid isn't taking any of this home.
The settlement is $150,000 because Amazon selected it. In short, it's their fault. Amazon screwed up. They were the ones that, in all likelihood, violated the student's license to those books by deleting them without notice, something that should've had even bigger consequences for them. (it's big enough of an outrage that it might be considered justified if it wound up with Kindle being utterly shut down)
As for how much the "kid" gets, some commenters should've read what jellico and bootleghooch said. As the latter noted, he's not getting a thing. Congrats once again to TG's editors for missing this critical point! And as the former said, the law firm will likely require a good portion of it as payment for their time, spending what would appear to be over two months of work.
Again, Amazon got off easy. They managed to avoid this being taken to higher courts, which would've garnered more press, and likely could've sunk their entire Kindle business. They obviously didn't want that coming from a mere pesky 'consumer' just because Amazon happened to violate their rights under copyright law. (yes, copyright law grants users rights, not just the holders!)
[citation][nom]Hope Slayer[/nom]manufactures can't do squat because the end dealer actually owns the end user rights of the vehicle[/citation]
Actually, this isn't quite correct. The dealer outright OWNS said car. Cars are not "licensed" in any way. The First Sale doctrine states that for actual physical products, (which are protected by one or more patents, not copyrights) the sale of a physical object with no intention of its return constitutes a sale, not a license, as has been the precident for about ~100 years, at least since Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell.
As such, the dealer actually OWNS the car, having purchased it from the manufacturer, and is free to do whatever they wish with it. They may only not legally violate the manufacturer's IP, which in that case, would mean making their own identical items.
The settlement is $150,000 because Amazon selected it. In short, it's their fault. Amazon screwed up. They were the ones that, in all likelihood, violated the student's license to those books by deleting them without notice, something that should've had even bigger consequences for them. (it's big enough of an outrage that it might be considered justified if it wound up with Kindle being utterly shut down)
As for how much the "kid" gets, some commenters should've read what jellico and bootleghooch said. As the latter noted, he's not getting a thing. Congrats once again to TG's editors for missing this critical point! And as the former said, the law firm will likely require a good portion of it as payment for their time, spending what would appear to be over two months of work.
Again, Amazon got off easy. They managed to avoid this being taken to higher courts, which would've garnered more press, and likely could've sunk their entire Kindle business. They obviously didn't want that coming from a mere pesky 'consumer' just because Amazon happened to violate their rights under copyright law. (yes, copyright law grants users rights, not just the holders!)
[citation][nom]Hope Slayer[/nom]manufactures can't do squat because the end dealer actually owns the end user rights of the vehicle[/citation]
Actually, this isn't quite correct. The dealer outright OWNS said car. Cars are not "licensed" in any way. The First Sale doctrine states that for actual physical products, (which are protected by one or more patents, not copyrights) the sale of a physical object with no intention of its return constitutes a sale, not a license, as has been the precident for about ~100 years, at least since Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell.
As such, the dealer actually OWNS the car, having purchased it from the manufacturer, and is free to do whatever they wish with it. They may only not legally violate the manufacturer's IP, which in that case, would mean making their own identical items.
nottheking
Distinguished
- Jan 5, 2006
- 311
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]ssddx[/nom]If we had a blackout would he go after the power company next?[/citation]
For one, the Kindle is a portable device. A power outage would simply mean he couldn't recharge it. Plus, as I recall, even if they suddenly lose power, they don't lose anything saved on them, and in fact, are merely stuck on their current page, as "e-ink" requires no power to hold the current image, only to change page.
More importantly, people know that power outages occur; we've all experienced them. I bet he figured, like probably everyone else too, that Amazon couldn't actually just reach out and alter EVERYONE's Kindles at will. I mean, it's a friggin' portable device. That basically amounts to hacking/cracking.
For one, the Kindle is a portable device. A power outage would simply mean he couldn't recharge it. Plus, as I recall, even if they suddenly lose power, they don't lose anything saved on them, and in fact, are merely stuck on their current page, as "e-ink" requires no power to hold the current image, only to change page.
More importantly, people know that power outages occur; we've all experienced them. I bet he figured, like probably everyone else too, that Amazon couldn't actually just reach out and alter EVERYONE's Kindles at will. I mean, it's a friggin' portable device. That basically amounts to hacking/cracking.
I will never buy one of these devices and wouldnot even use one if you gave it to me and offered to buy me 10 years of ebooks.
I own paper books......over 1,000 and i buy/sell scifi and world war 2 books mostly.all 1st editions.
yeah like i am going to buy stupid ebooks
I own paper books......over 1,000 and i buy/sell scifi and world war 2 books mostly.all 1st editions.
yeah like i am going to buy stupid ebooks
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Free design app to create a 3D effect on images- Started by pilgr1mag3
- Replies: 4
-
Question Nikon D40X - How to import filters/colour simulations
- Started by zataka
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter