Kindle Deleted Ayn Rand Content

[F1Wild]

Originally Posted by Argel

Can you say what makes you conclude that this is the case?

The Amazon terms state: The Device Software will provide Amazon with data about your Device and its interaction with the Service (such as available memory, up-time, log files and signal strength) and information related to the content on your Device and your use of it.

In other words Amazon make it quite clear that they will look at what you have on your Kindle. And that has presumably to be taken in the light of another condition of sale, namely: You may not use the Device, the Service or the Digital Content for any illegal purpose.

Taken together that would make me very reluctant to carry any material to which Amazon might take exception, particularly DRM-stripped files, regardless of the fact that they have not so far taken action against DRM-strippers.

Thanks for clearing this up. So, when you accept the terms you are accepting this activity. Truthfully I accept what Amazon is doing far more than our own government with their "Patriot Act" blanket over illegal spying.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Riocaz

Amazon's explanation: http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6651080.html

The discussion here about the problem at the time: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44781

What? Actual facts in this thread? It is true, everything posted on a computer stays forever.

[Riocaz]

I never said it was a fact, just "their explanation". I would be willing to make a bet there was more to it than that. But it wasn't true to say that they gave no attempt to explain their actions.

[Who are you?]

Originally Posted by F1Wild

Thanks for clearing this up. So, when you accept the terms you are accepting this activity. Truthfully I accept what Amazon is doing far more than our own government with their "Patriot Act" blanket over illegal spying.

It's not cleared up by that quoted bit of text. It only states that Amazon can view what you have on your kindle, not remove it. The illegal part is not relevant either, because the kindle users aren't the ones doing something illegal, it's Amazon (if indeed they had no license to sell the Ayn Rand novels).

The relevant part of the terms of service is this:

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.

Nowhere in the license agreement / terms of service does Amazon give itself the right to alter or remove digital content from the Kindle, only to update the device software and view/know what digital content you have on the device and how you use it.

[Riocaz]

Originally Posted by Who are you?

Nowhere in the license agreement / terms of service does Amazon give itself the right to alter or remove digital content from the Kindle, only to update the device software and view/know what digital content you have on the device and how you use it.

YET...

IANAL... And even if I was UK law wouldn't apply here...

Amendment. Amazon reserves the right to amend any of the terms of this Agreement at its sole discretion by posting the revised terms on the Kindle Store or the Amazon.com website. Your continued use of the Device and Software after the effective date of any such amendment shall be deemed your agreement to be bound by such amendment.

[Riocaz]

Originally Posted by Who are you?

Nowhere in the license agreement / terms of service does Amazon give itself the right to alter or remove digital content from the Kindle, only to update the device software and view/know what digital content you have on the device and how you use it.

YET...

It does also state:

Amendment. Amazon reserves the right to amend any of the terms of this Agreement at its sole discretion by posting the revised terms on the Kindle Store or the Amazon.com website. Your continued use of the Device and Software after the effective date of any such amendment shall be deemed your agreement to be bound by such amendment.

IANAL... And even if I was UK law wouldn't apply here... But I'm pretty sure any changes made wouldn't be retroactive.

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by Riocaz

YET...

IANAL... And even if I was UK law wouldn't apply here... But I'm pretty sure any changes made wouldn't be retroactive.

Yes and no. They would say it was retroactive, but it would never hold up in court (if it ever went there).

[kacir]

We have learned now that Amazon CAN and WILL delete content from your Kindle. Period.

Yesterday it was a novel they sold you through the store and then realized they had no right to sell it.
Who knows what it is going to be tomorrow?
A file they think might be pirated? A file they deem inappropriate?

I do not want a device that a third party can rifle through and do whatever they wish with the content

[timezone]

I think the arguments are crazy. The books are bought and sold. There is no license to use the books. Once the book is bought it is the property of the user.

What happened maybe similar to Fictionwise. Fictionwise awhile ago ended a relationship with one of the publishers. I lost a few books when I bought the iRex Digital Reader with a new MobiPocket ID. I could still read these particular books on the old reader but was unable to move them to the new reader. In Amazon's case there will never be a new reader issue because each new reader can be associated with the Amazon account if I got that right and the old one can be removed. It put Amazon in a difficult situation but still I believe they had no right to pull the book.

[daffy4u]

Originally Posted by timezone

I think the arguments are crazy. The books are bought and sold. There is no license to use the books. Once the book is bought it is the property of the user.

Kindle books are licensed.

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.

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by Riocaz

It was more than just Lesbian and gay titles. It was also not all of them (just a majority from what was reported at the time).

And it's also not true to say that "no reason was given" they did give a reason and stated that it was not intentional, but an unexpected result of another change they had made if memory serves.

Whether or not you believe this explanation is another point entirely.

No reason was given AT THE TIME the action was taken. I thought that was clear from the context of my original post. Only after bloggers got up in arms and there was talk of a boycott did Amazon come up with the "unintentional glitch" explanation.

I never said it was "all titles" so the fact that some come up if you type "lesbian" to do a search proves nothing.

Many, many LGBT titles are still not listed in search results or sales rankings.

This thread is going nowhere fast. I'm not here to bash Amazon or the Kindle, but some seem to be here only to blindly defend.

EDIT: to go back on topic, I met with a group of IP attorneys today, and the consensus was that had A not taken action to remove the files, even though they had the capability to do so, their liability for distributing content illegally would be greater. FWIW.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by basschick

aand be honest, folks - how many of you actually read all the terms and conditions before you bought your kindle? http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custom...4530&#wireless

"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..."

Sounds like you buy it, you have the right to keep it.

Except it also says, "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."

So... Amazon perhaps claims the right to go into any Kindle at any time, and remove all the ebooks therein.

Nowhere in the TOS does it say "if Amazon decides that it did not wish to provide a particular bit of digital content, it has the right to remove it from people who purchased it in good faith." It says both, "you bought it; you get to keep it" and "Amazon can revoke all your access at any time, with no warning or explanation" (which should properly terrify every Amazon customer; who knows when they'll decide to "remove all anti-patriotic content?"), but it never implies that Amazon will be removing individual purchases.

[F1Wild]

Originally Posted by Who are you?

It's not cleared up by that quoted bit of text. It only states that Amazon can view what you have on your kindle, not remove it. The illegal part is not relevant either, because the kindle users aren't the ones doing something illegal, it's Amazon (if indeed they had no license to sell the Ayn Rand novels).

The relevant part of the terms of service is this:


Nowhere in the license agreement / terms of service does Amazon give itself the right to alter or remove digital content from the Kindle, only to update the device software and view/know what digital content you have on the device and how you use it.

Thanks for making this more clear...(better usage of the root word 'clear'?)

[F1Wild]

My thoughts are - if you are that unhappy with what has gone on then do something about it. Research possible lawsuits agains Amazon or look into starting one. Check with the ACLU - they would know.

Also, I've been told there are various firewall-type applications in the works (if not already available) to block outgoing access to Kindles.

Let's be proactive......or just vent on a forum.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by daffy4u

Kindle books are licensed.

It's been ruled in court that a "permanent license to use" is a sale, regardless of what the seller calls it. The seller can't demand that there's no resale rights, or that the purchaser cannot allow others to view the content.

This relates to two cases: one where someone was reselling boxed software on eBay, and the company wanted to claim copyright infringement (how, I'm not sure; it was the original box & CDs being sold); the ruling from that drew from an older case involving movies that had been sold with the criteria that they couldn't be resold or watched, and other movies that had been sold as cellulose scrap and the producers were outraged to discover that some of them were being resold as movies, not as plastic.

The rulings hinged on the concept of permanence: if there was a schedule or expectation of returning the content, it was licensed; if the purchaser was not expected to return it, it was a sale.

(Since digital content is rather ridiculous to "return," I think it's likely they'd assume time-limited DRM as the "return" policy--hence DRM'd library books are licensed, not sold/given away.)

Since Amazon makes no claim that the books must be returned, or deleted, after any particular time, nor in a given set of circumstances, they're sold, not licensed. Amazon is lying to its customers in the hopes that none of them will have big enough lawyers to challenge that.