Article.
So the publisher decided it no longer wanted 2 books to be eBooks any more. So Amazon deleted them from all Kindles, and refunded the buyers' money.
I can understand "no longer wanting to sell a book as an eBook" - but wtf?
Kindle can remove your books too
Ah. That doesn't seem to be reported anywhere
(in the comments)
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/Ninetee....&sr=1-2 it looks like the book is still available from a major publisher.
(in the comments)
It's not me, it's someone else.
Amazon speaks:
Amazon said late Friday that it recalled two Kindle e-books because the publisher lacked the rights to the book. However, in the future, it says it won't pull already downloaded material from customers' devices.
The removal of two George Orwell books from the accounts of those who had already purchased them sparked an outcry from customers, bloggers, and mainstream media outlets.
"These books were added to our catalog using our self-service platform by a third-party who did not have the rights to the books," Amazon spokesman Drew Herdener said in an e-mail. "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."
Herdener said Amazon won't handle things the same way in the future. "We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers' devices in these circumstances."
Some said that Amazon's move appeared to violate its own terms of service.
It's not me, it's someone else.
That's a touchy situation for Amazon, a bit damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't. Pull 'em and you've pissed off customers. Don't pull 'em and you've pissed off your content providers.
Probably the cleanest answer for Amazon when this happens would be to leave sold copies in place, but divert all proceeds of the illegitimate sales (including their own cut as well) to the proper holder of the rights.
Probably the cleanest answer for Amazon when this happens would be to leave sold copies in place, but divert all proceeds of the illegitimate sales (including their own cut as well) to the proper holder of the rights.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Yeah, I think real world is best analogy. If someone sells pirated copyrighted works, then they are liable for damages, and the publisher should sue them. I think Amazon gets by with a "return associated payments to rightful publisher." And the end-user keeps their stuff.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Amazzon pres makes pretty much the best statement ever about this.
http://www.amazon.com/tag....sDetail
http://www.amazon.com/tag....sDetail
This is an apology for the way we previously handled illegally sold copies of 1984 and other novels on Kindle. Our "solution" to the problem was stupid, thoughtless, and painfully out of line with our principles. It is wholly self-inflicted, and we deserve the criticism we've received. We will use the scar tissue from this painful mistake to help make better decisions going forward, ones that match our mission.
With deep apology to our customers,
Jeff Bezos
Founder & CEO
Amazon.com
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Obama said he could have "calibrated" his words differently. Does that pass as an apology?
"Because this has been ratcheting up -- and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up -- I want to make clear that in my choice of words, I think, I unfortunately... gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge police department or Sgt. Crowley specifically," the president said. "And I could've calibrated those words differently. And I told this to Sgt. Crowley."
It's not me, it's someone else.
Thread misfire?TheCatt wrote:Obama said he could have "calibrated" his words differently. Does that pass as an apology?
"Because this has been ratcheting up -- and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up -- I want to make clear that in my choice of words, I think, I unfortunately... gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge police department or Sgt. Crowley specifically," the president said. "And I could've calibrated those words differently. And I told this to Sgt. Crowley."
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Juxtaposition.Malcolm wrote:Thread misfire?TheCatt wrote:Obama said he could have "calibrated" his words differently. Does that pass as an apology?
"Because this has been ratcheting up -- and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up -- I want to make clear that in my choice of words, I think, I unfortunately... gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge police department or Sgt. Crowley specifically," the president said. "And I could've calibrated those words differently. And I told this to Sgt. Crowley."
It's not me, it's someone else.
Obama's always hated Eastasia.GORDON wrote:Difference is, Bezos said, "We were stupid, and we've learned from it." Obama said, "You didn't understand what I meant because you were stupid, so let me explain better."
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."