Doubleplusungood: That Copy Of 1984 On Your Kindle Is Now Gone

from the you-never-had-that-book... dept

Fri, Jul 17th 2009 5:44pm — Mike Masnick

For quite some time we've been pointing out the simple fact that, unlike with a physical book, you don't really own the ebooks that you buy on your Amazon Kindle. Even worse, Amazon can simply delete them at will. In fact, that's exactly what's happened to (of all books!) George Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm. Talk about irony. People who legitimately purchased those books discovered that they're now gone, as the publisher has decided that ebook versions were doubleplusungood and should never have existed in the first place. So, like the war with Eurasia, the book is now just a figment of your imagination. You never had it. At least Amazon refunded the money, but what kind of book do you buy that gets automatically disappeared? eBooks are an interesting concept, but how can anyone buy into something where their books might suddenly disappear? Update: The NY Times is now reporting that Amazon says it will change its system so that, in the future, books won't be deleted. However, that's not making many customers happy. They seem pretty pissed off -- with some noting that Amazon's own terms of service claim that you have a permanent right to the content once you've bought it. On top of that, the Times quotes a student who had taken a bunch of notes, which Amazon destroyed as well.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: 1984, ebooks, george orwell, kindle, ownership
Companies: amazon

92 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

mjb5406 (profile), 17 Jul 2009 @ 5:52pm

Amazon is at fault on fronts
First, Amazon should never have deleted purchased content; I can see privacy issues being raised even now by the ACLU, since it's no different than, say, Microsoft going onto your PC and deleting your copy of Word because you're still running Word 2003 and they insist you can onl;y run Word 2007 now.

But... Amazon should NEVER have signed any distribution agreements with any publisher that insisted on the "kill switch". MobuleReference should have been told to go to hell.

Unfortunately, like with the Authors' Guild being able to bully Amazon into allowing the text-to-speech ability to be disabled at the whim of an author, Amazon and its legal team have shown themselves to be absolutely, totally spineless. Consumer be damned... our partners are more important.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 6:20pm
  
  Re: Amazon is at fault on three fronts
  Third, and most importantly, Amazon should not have hidden the possibility from from customers. That was just plain fraudulent.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - mjb5406 (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 11:14am
    
    Re: Re: Amazon is at fault on three fronts
    I'm not sure that they did... I remember reading something about their remote "kill" ability around the same time it came out that Apple can remotely remove App Store applications from everyone's iPhone without their knowledge.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 7:14pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Amazon is at fault on three fronts
      I'm not sure that they did... I remember reading something about their remote "kill" ability...
      
      Oh, well it must be true then if you remember reading it. We don't need any references.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 2:28pm
  
  Re: Amazon is at fault on fronts
  > Amazon should NEVER have signed any distribution agreements with any publisher that insisted on the "kill switch".
  
  You should be smart enough to never buy a device with a kill switch. (At least with the one that's not controlled by you)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - braindead (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 6:56pm
    
    Re: Re: Amazon is at fault on fronts
    actually you should be smart enough to never buy a DRMed product.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mjb5406 (profile), 17 Jul 2009 @ 5:53pm

Whoops
Title for my first post should have been "Amazon is at fault on TWO fronts". My bad!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Duncan Yoyo (profile), 17 Jul 2009 @ 6:01pm

Another lawsuit Amazon may want to lose.
Well we have to figure someone will be annoyed enough to sue Amazon over the disappearing Orwell. Given that perhaps Amazon wants a court telling them they can't do that anymore giving them the right to tell any publisher who wants to shove off.

I still am waiting for a blind organization to sue over the disabled text to speech feature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 6:23pm

And they wonder why people download these things illegally. My pirated copy of 1984 doesn't simply vanish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:33pm
  
  Re:
  You should also also get cozy with Huxley's "Brave New World"
  
  Here's a primer: a very interesting speech from March 1962.
  http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/hux2.ram
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 6:37pm

Federal Offense?
If the terms the Kindle owners agreed to didn't give Amazon permission to do this, then didn't Amazon exceed their authorization in regards to federal computer crime laws? Isn't that a felony? Once again, I expect the Justice Department turn a blind eye to corporate crime. Let's see if I'm right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 6:53pm

Crimes
If Amazon sold the product to consumers with the guarantee of permanent ownership, it does not have the right to unilaterally delete those products--even if it refunds the money, in the same way that if I sell you a television I cannot later sneak into your house and take the TV, even if I leave the money you originally paid for it behind.

The affected customers should sue, and should press for criminal charges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ConceptJunkie (profile), 19 Jul 2009 @ 4:03pm
  
  Re: Crimes
  it does not have the right to unilaterally delete those products I beg to differ. It seems it does.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:02pm

BTW, NYT completely lifted the comment from Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/17/amazon-remotely-deletes-orwell-e-books-from-kindles-unpersons-r/ comments/20213793/) without attribution. They even quoted him directly. Yay for blogs always getting the news from the "real" news media!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Claiborne White, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:49pm
  
  Re: BTW, NYT completely lifted the comment from Engadget
  I love examples of the blogsphere scooping MSM but your example doesn't seem to hold water. Time stamps show publication of the NYT post by David Pogue more than 3 hours prior to the Engadget article by Laura June, even accounting for time zone differentials.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 9:03pm
    
    Re: Re: BTW, NYT completely lifted the comment from Engadget
    Time stamps show publication of the NYT post by David Pogue more than 3 hours prior to the Engadget article by Laura June, even accounting for time zone differentials.
    
    Which "time stamps" are you basing this claim on?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Doubter, 17 Jul 2009 @ 9:11pm
    
    Re: Re: BTW, NYT completely lifted the comment from Engadget
    Time stamps show publication of the NYT post by David Pogue more than 3 hours prior to the Engadget article by Laura June,
    
    Engadget wrote that Drew Herdener contacted them directly with the quote that also appeared in the NYT. So are you saying that Engadget is lying? I think you need to post this supposed proof of yours.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dan, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:02pm

Ironic
How ironic that they pulled 1984.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bobbyr1 (profile), 19 Jul 2009 @ 11:45pm
  
  Re: Ironic
  Too much like what's happening today.............
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fungo Knubb, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:07pm

Never!
What a great example supporting my decision to not purchase any eBooks whatsoever. I was indeed seriously thinking of doing so, but this just smacks of criminal activity on Amazon's part. So much for the eBook concept - now you see it, now you don't. To hell with Amazon ... book stores here I come!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jimsin630, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:20pm
  
  Re: Never!
  i do my ebooks from websubscription.com and fictionwise.com.
  lot of good books for free from project gutenburg, but they do appreciate a donation, which i do religously
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - owh, 18 Jul 2009 @ 11:14am
    
    @jimsin630
    Sorry, but http://websubscription.com/ is a squatted typo kind of page full of search terms.
    
    I am sure you meant http://websubscriptions.com/, which I easily guessed.
    
    Still, thanks for the pointers to these two interesting sites (websubscriptions.com and fictionwise.com).
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - mjb5406 (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 11:17am
      
      Re: @jimsin630
      Um... websubscriptions.com is ALSO a squatting site!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Eldakka, 20 Jul 2009 @ 12:51am
        
        Re: Re: @jimsin630
        try webscriptions.NET
        
        I have been using them since 1999.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - jim sinyard, 13 Sep 2009 @ 8:02pm
        
        Re: Re: @jimsin630
        sorry, the correct address is
        webscription.net
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Warren, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:11pm

Paper based books can't be deleted
Nothing beats ink on paper bound up into a book form, sitting on a shelf until the moment of need/desire.

No ID, password or batteries required.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 2:31pm
  
  Re: Paper based books can't be deleted
  > Nothing beats ink on paper bound up into a book form,
  
  Until you need to move to another house. Ouch, these things are heavy! (At least if you own more than a couple).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2009 @ 10:06am
    
    Re: Re: Paper based books can't be deleted
    >Until you need to move to another house. Ouch, these things are heavy!
    
    So is furniture, your point?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2009 @ 5:49am
    
    Re: Re: Paper based books can't be deleted
    lol...Tell me about it. In our last move we exceeded 100 book boxes...more than 5,000 books. Not one has ever been remotely deleted by the publisher.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ToySouljah (profile), 19 Jul 2009 @ 11:21pm
  
  Re: Paper based books can't be deleted
  Totally agree. I personally can't read from an ebook for very long without my eyes feeling like I've been reading all day. I prefer actual books and will occasionally download an ebook I already own for quick referencing since it is much easier to search through lol.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:12pm

It's weird how this is affecting the eBook concept (in comments everywhere where this is reported). It's not the eBook that's wrong, it's the DRM that they put on them (and these proprietary format devices, also). The same could happen with games, proprietary format music, movies, etc. Also, isn't the source for the kindle open? The kill switch must be there somewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 7:14pm

How about changing it so Amazon Can't (not won't) Delete books already downloaded ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:29pm

Calling All Kindle Fanboys
Where are all the Kindle fan-boys (investors? paid shills?) that showed up here before to swear that Amazon didn't even have the capability to do this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sarah Black, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:48pm

Whats this you say? A netbook can be purchased for less than the newest Kindle?

And a netbook can read full PDF novels without the worry of a company deleting them from your drive... oh, and a netbook can be used for so much more than just reading books?

Blasphemy!!

Personally, I still prefer physical books. I can take them to the beach or in my backyard and read them without the worry of stupid things like sand or sun instantly ruining my purches.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Eldakka, 20 Jul 2009 @ 12:54am
  
  Re:
  netbooks, at least those I am aware of, don't use an e-ink screen. It is the e-ink screen that makes all the difference, it's about the same as reading a real book.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:52pm

Doublespeak
“We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances,”

Now let me get this straight: Amazon says it is changing its system to keep itself from doing again what it chose to do in the first place again in the future? Yeah, right. Talk about doublespeak. No wonder they deleted 1984.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Long, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:57pm

Could be worse...
There's another troubling side to this, one that's double-plus-ironic considering the whole 1984 aspect.

If they can download a book, and if they can delete a book, then they certainly have the capability to REPLACE a book. Imagine that some night thousands of Kindle ebooks disappear and then reappear... altered.

We are at war with Eurasia. We've always been at war with Eurasia...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 8:59pm

Farenheit 451 is next...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ben, 19 Jul 2009 @ 11:35am
  
  Re: "Farenheit 451 is next..."
  You start to wonder who is really behind the Kindle?
  
  Paranoia will destroy ya!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2009 @ 9:23pm

I was referring to the comment by Justin Garownsky. You can get all of the information in the NYT from his profile page in Engadget, and the comment in the NYT is copied verbatim, commas and everything. That part of the article, they lifted directly. At least it shows that they can read comments, even if they think they're ridiculous and won't let you comment on their site.

BTW, I've been checking out the cool copyright thingie they have. It never ceases to amaze me. First, a "blog" and an "internet site" are different things. And then, you can have regional internets, apparently! Also, the price to publish the note in your intranet is U$S 1000. Cool, huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Silver, 17 Jul 2009 @ 9:26pm

Ironic
Maybe amazon pulled 1984 because their customers have realized that the government portrayed in 1984 IS actually happening?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dan, 17 Jul 2009 @ 10:23pm

And this is why...
I will never spend a dime on any music, ebook, audiobook, or any device that plays them that is hobbled with DRM..ever. I buy a lot of music on Amazon, simply because it's in a format that they can't pull this kind of crap with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bob, 17 Jul 2009 @ 11:58pm

An Interesting Note
The Kindle has dropped in price.
It looks like it's getting a bad reputation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Space Pirate, 18 Jul 2009 @ 1:20am

Duh
If you read either of those books before having bought a kindle or any 'content' for it this would have come as no surprise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 2:04am

people were stupid to buy into the kindle to begin with, I have no sympathy for them.

Anti-DRM

Digital RENTAL Media
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
theskyrider (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 3:24am

Ray Bradbury
"Fahrenheit 451 is next."

Unfortunately, you'll have to pick another title. As reported here on Techdirt, Ray Bradbury hates the internet and will never release digital copies.

"Burn em to ashes, then burn the ashes."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws.org (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 3:55am
  
  Re: Ray Bradbury
  Which most likely won't stop any scanners from the ebookz scene.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2009 @ 5:45am
  
  Re: Ray Bradbury
  Ray Bradbury will "never" release digital copies? Then what is a CDROM? I thought that was considered "digital."
  
  http://www.amazon.com/Fahrenheit-451-Temperature-Which-Catches/dp/9562911047/ref=ed_oe _o
  
  I also note that "Fahrenheit 451" is available as an audio CD, which I also believed was a "digital" format. My ignorance knows no bounds.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2009 @ 9:09am
    
    Re: Re: Ray Bradbury
    Yeah, it amuses me when people want to start throwing around what they think is the latest hip lingo without even knowing what it means. Thinking that "digital" and "internet" are the same thing is a good example.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rik, 18 Jul 2009 @ 3:54am

Copyright based business is not based on a healthy business case. Copyright Legislation is completely out-dated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 4:06am

Fahrenheit 451 is on torrents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NullOp, 18 Jul 2009 @ 5:50am

Bookz
Rulz of MyWorld:

All books, movies, music, plays, etc are copyrighted 20 years. After that everything is public domain. No exceptions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lucretious, 18 Jul 2009 @ 6:22am

"It was SNOWBALL! He did it!!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chet K. (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 9:00am

This is truly an effective marketing strategy...
...for selling actual books. I'm convinced that the entire Kindle existence is a beautifully effective marketing strategy to show people how DRM and copyright issues will always make real books printed on actual paper far more valuable.

And selling books was the original goal at Amazon, right? They've certainly convinced me to purchase only ink and paper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sammich, 18 Jul 2009 @ 9:11am

Is it really Amazon?
Once again Amazon gets blamed for something publishers do. I'm a sometime Amazon customer, not necessarily a fan (Bezos isn't always right). There's some blame here, but I don't think it's going to the right entity. To wit:

1997: Publishers cut deals with distributors, who cut huge deals to megabookstores--independent bookstores lose. Amazon steps in to fill the gap, gets blamed for nuking small bookstores.

2009: Publisher decides an ebook was a mistake and tells Amazon to pull it. Amazon may or may not think that's a hot idea, but they have to comply if they want to keep their deals with the publisher. Ebook is pulled, Amazon gets blamed.

Therefore the Kindle is an invalid format, a bad idea, a blot on the Constitution? Sorry guys, I don't get your logic. DRM has to go, but given that Amazon is a retailer, they'd be happy with whatever increases their margin. Right now publishers insist on DRM. If Amazon doesn't cave, they lose their ebook product as well as distribution deals on paper books.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- braindead (profile), 18 Jul 2009 @ 6:03pm
  
  Re: Is it really Amazon?
  2009: Publisher decides an ebook was a mistake and tells Amazon to pull it. Amazon may or may not think that's a hot idea, but they have to comply if they want to keep their deals with the publisher. Ebook is pulled, Amazon gets blamed.
  
  of course they will, if they want to keep there customers they should protect them. If you have books but no customers your not going far, but if you have customers then publishers will have no choice but to deal with you, I am sure you are familiar with the saying "if you build it they will come"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 7:01pm
  
  Re: Is it really Amazon?
  If Amazon doesn't cave, they lose their ebook product as well as distribution deals on paper books.
  
  Judge: So what do you have to say for yourself?
  
  Crook: You see, ya Honor, I didn't wanna shoot that guy, but I gots to make a livin', see? I mean, the gut what hired me said he wussint gonna pay me no more 'lessen I did it, so I didn't have no choice. You can't expect me to miss out on my profits, can ya? I'm a bizness man and I gots other people dependin' on me too. So ya see, it wuzzint my fault, I *had* to do it!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 9:51am

it's a shame they didn't delete Fahrenheit 451, that would make the irony complete
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gary, 18 Jul 2009 @ 10:42am
  
  Re:
  For complete irony, Amazon would have to remotely set your Kindle on fire.
  
  It was a pleasure to burn.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew D. Todd, 18 Jul 2009 @ 9:58am

Kindle Spam Problem.
According to the report on Ars Technica, the publisher, Mobile Reference, was apparently some fly-by-night operation which was automatically vacuuming up free content on The Gutenberg Project, automatically reformatting it to the special Kindle format, and turning around and selling it on Kindle for about fifty cents a book. They probably wrote a script to copy over the Gutenberg Project's directories and instantly set themselves up as a publisher of thousands of titles, without ever even looking at the titles. However, it seems that, intentionally or otherwise, they pulled in content from the Australian Gutenberg Project, which conforms to the more liberal Australian copyright law.

The curious thing about the Kindle is that it is set up in such a way that customers expect to pay even for free content. These people apparently exploited it by writing a fully automatic program to generate kindle copies of just about everything they could get for free. Amazon apparently has some kind of indexing problem which causes people to pay for public-domain books even when they are available for free. Operations like Mobile Reference seem to be the Kindle's equivalent of comment spam.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/amazon-sold-pirated-books-raided-some-kindl es.ars

http://ireaderreview.com/2009/06/29/kindle-store-discoverablity-problem-is-getting-worse/

For Amazon, the Kindle is a blunder. They need to stop dreaming about selling E-content, and concentrate on the business of selling small physical objects, which may be used books or may be sets of wrenches.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 9:59am

It's theft,
they took something that was not theirs, these kindle owners purchased these books, just because they are in electronic format does not mean they can just take them back. people should never buy a kindle, ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gary, 18 Jul 2009 @ 10:40am

War against Eurasia?
I'm sorry, but we are and always have been at war against Eastasia.

Gentlemen, please!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Moby, 18 Jul 2009 @ 11:35am

And people wonder why I'm against the whole digital distribution thing. I go to read the book on my kindle and its been deleted. So I go to my ps3 or 360 to watch the movie and it's been deleted. No issues if just bought the dvd or the paper back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 2:27pm

At least it's more nature friendly...
...than *burning* the books...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 3:22pm

To the pro-copyright crowd: now THIS is called stealing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2009 @ 7:16pm
  
  Re:
  To the pro-copyright crowd: now THIS is called stealing.
  
  Yep, because you're actually taking something away from someone.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
theskyrider (profile), 19 Jul 2009 @ 3:37am

AP Headlines calling it Piracy
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090718/ap_on_en_ot/us_books_orwell_removed

I wonder if any of the profits from this 'Piracy' went to terrorists.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/03/us-attorney-general-piracy-funds-terr or.ars
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2009 @ 6:48am

I buy my ebooks from Baen and not a single one has or ever will vanish. Actually, I have been buying eBooks from Baen Books for alot longer than the Kindle or any other device has existed. Still got all those books too. www.baen.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pwdrskir (profile), 19 Jul 2009 @ 8:08am

Enslavement
We have seen how corporations deal with people, we are a means to an end (profit), expendable and disposable. Corporations are trying to tyrannize our books, music, news, television, healthcare, Internet; they will stop at nothing to enslave us all.

“By 2050—earlier, probably—all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron—they'll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually contradictory of what they used to be.”
-George Orwell, (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2009 @ 12:18pm
  
  Re: Enslavement
  1984 wasn't a warning, it was an instruction manual.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
wifezilla, 19 Jul 2009 @ 12:06pm

Long live fictionwise.com!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nick, 19 Jul 2009 @ 1:46pm

Publisher didn't have the rights (from Ars Technica)
According to Ars, the book was pulled because the publisher didn't have the rights to distribute the affected eBooks in the first place.

That doesn't excuse Amazon's woeful mishandling of the situation, but it did do a wonderful job of highlighting both the stupidity of ridiculously long copyright periods (Orwell died in 1950, but the books are still under copyright 49 years later - yep, I'm sure he's working on that next best seller right now!) as well as the risks of letting someone else control your media library (not so easy for a company to come into your house and take back a book they sold you that they didn't actually have the rights to).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nick, 19 Jul 2009 @ 8:15pm
  
  Re: Publisher didn't have the rights (from Ars Technica)
  2009-1950 = 59! (oops...)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ljseinfeld, 19 Jul 2009 @ 3:29pm

In case you were wondering:
The technically-superior 'pirated' copy of 1984 that I found floating around the internet still works just fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas, 19 Jul 2009 @ 3:29pm

Good Reason not to buy Kindle
Excellent reason not to buy Kindle or that ilk. If I purchase a hard book, at least no one can simply take it away from me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2009 @ 11:57pm

From the NY Times article.

“I never imagined that Amazon actually had the right, the authority or even the ability to delete something that I had already purchased.” -Charles Slater

Very well said. As for me, I'll simply say "NO" to the Kindle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2009 @ 6:06am

Kudos to Amazon and all the idiots who bought into that Kindle garbage!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris R, 20 Jul 2009 @ 11:31am

What were they thinking?
I wonder what else they can do with your Kindle. Maybe I am just being paranoid, but the thought of Amazon gaining access to my personal property and controlling it is very unsettling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ronk, 20 Jul 2009 @ 11:33am

I may still buy a kindle
Or not,

You just need to go into it understanding what you are getting into.

I suspect if I already owned a Kindle and this happened, I would be pissed too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cipher-0, 20 Jul 2009 @ 12:08pm

I don't understand the fuss...
The book 1984 has never been available for the Kindle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yani, 20 Jul 2009 @ 1:04pm

ironic..
I wonder if the Kindle will spawn a new form of artistic medium where the hyperlink is given mass importance. I found an interesting discussion of the subject on Pandalous. It's here: http://www.pandalous.com/topic/is_the_world_ready_for
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2009 @ 1:17pm

I am thinking about getting an e-book reader. I even considered the Kindle versus Sony's because of some good reviews. However, this issue is a deal-breaker for me. Sorry, Amazon pals, your duty was to save face with your customers and deal with your partners as you can; just remember where does the cash come from.

Actually, the fact that _that_ kind of code actually existed and was hidden from the public breaks the trust between dealer and customer. That is not a good way to make business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gypsy Outlaw, 21 Jul 2009 @ 1:13pm

Interesting that it's Bradbury's book(s) at issue. Can you say "Fahrenheit 451?" What Amazon did (deleting books w/o the "owner's" permission) is no different than what many over-controlling, dictatorial governments and religions have done; at least they had the balls to actually go to your house or local library and take the books to burn, not just silently delete them in the night. This is not the obvious villains we've come to watch out for in the past, it's corporate control of what we can, and can not, own that is now the danger. Hell, they can even track your cell phone when it's turned off if it's the right make/model. Anyone remember "Max Headroom?" If I could be a 'blank,' I'd be one, no matter how "convenient" the corps want their property thought of in your life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rabbit80, 22 Jul 2009 @ 5:48am

Wouldn't it have been a better idea to forward the money from the sales to the publisher rather than deleting the book from the users and refunding them? I doubt that there could have been any recourse from the publisher if Amazon had done that and apologised - as well as which the whole shebang could have been kept under wraps and not made Amazon, the Kindle or the publisher look bad!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ryan, 22 Jul 2009 @ 6:00am

DRM Crap
Just a couple sections out of there disclosure for the kindle.

'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.'

'Kindle books are intended to be read only on Kindle devices or with a Kindle mobile reading application. Your Kindle ebooks will be accessible for as long as you own a Kindle and have an active Amazon account. Access to your Kindle ebooks may be discontinued should your Amazon account be terminated. Kindle ebooks may not be read on any competing digital reading device.'

and if you email them asking if they have any way of telling what books contain drm and which dont.

'Thanks for sending us your question about Digital Rights Management for Amazon Kindle content. Publishers choose whether or not they apply DRM to their content, and when they do, we respect and protect that DRM.

At this time we do not post information as to which books have DRM, and which do not. I’ll pass your request along to the Kindle team as a suggestion though.'

I agree that a book is still great, but not always practical. I like my sony ebook. It does pdf format and I can just download anywhere and convert it. It does have drm, but easily turned off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jimbo, 22 Jul 2009 @ 2:12pm

You'll never even hear about this...
You will probably never even hear about this on CNN, FOX News, or any news media. This never happened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tomas verde, 22 Jul 2009 @ 6:35pm

kindle, kindling
are we brain dead ,lazy or just getting stupid(er) ???? GET THE BOOK, READ THE BOOK , TAKE IT BACK TO YOUR LIBRARY, OR LOCAL BOOKSTORE AND GET ANOTHER BOOK OR PUT IT INTO YOUR OWN LIBRARY.!!! WHY DEPEND ON SOMEONE ELSES BULLSHIT ON KEEPING IT FOR YOU. GET A JOB GET A LIFE, GET SERIOUS AND HAVE SOME FUN, MOVE ON .........THANK YOU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
M P, 25 Jul 2009 @ 12:42pm

Unlike Kindle. Sony Reader cannot be accessed by BB
That's why I prefer Sony Reader. You upload books to it from your computer, not some network watched by Big Brother. You can upload your own notes, or books your bought anywhere (not just 1 vendor), or free stuff. Kindle with its direct connection to Amazon is more limited and hackable by BB.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Licht, 26 Jul 2009 @ 12:16pm

We were warned
Six months ago bloggers (notably Stephanie at UrbZen) warned about this kind of thing.

See:

http://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2009/07/25/kindle-see-we-told-you-so/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kindle purchase, 5 Aug 2009 @ 1:47am

http://www.kindleport.com/
Good battery life when wireless is turned off
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
kidle books, 1 Apr 2011 @ 12:09am

kindle
I very happy to use it because their latest futur perfect are can use it in any area no problems charging.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nancy Leaver, 29 Nov 2016 @ 5:06pm

1984/Orwell
It was a question on Jeopardy tonight. The answers here talk about KIndle but their statement talked about 1949 - that was long before Kindle, wasn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]