Topic: The latest example of why I hate DRM (Read 9531 times)

Nemesis · « **on:** July 17, 2009, 07:13:43 pm »

Quote

But no, apparently the publisher changed its mind about offering an electronic edition, and apparently Amazon, whose business lives and dies by publisher happiness, caved. It electronically deleted all books by this author from people’s Kindles and credited their accounts for the price.

When Big Brother struck what books did they take? 1984 and Animal Farm. It seems some purchases are more equal than others.

knightstorm · « **Reply #1 on:** July 17, 2009, 07:59:19 pm »

While I normally play devil's advocate in these DRM debates, this time I have to agree with you. This crosses the line.

toasty0 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 18, 2009, 10:05:55 am »

Quote from: Nemesis on July 17, 2009, 07:13:43 pm

Link to full article

Quote
But no, apparently the publisher changed its mind about offering an electronic edition, and apparently Amazon, whose business lives and dies by publisher happiness, caved. It electronically deleted all books by this author from people’s Kindles and credited their accounts for the price.

When Big Brother struck what books did they take? 1984 and Animal Farm. It seems some purchases are more equal than others.

Big Brother? I object to the inflammatory characterization of writers and their works or the inflammatory characterization of any artist trying to control their works.

marstone · « **Reply #3 on:** July 18, 2009, 11:23:30 am »

Quote from: toasty0 on July 18, 2009, 10:05:55 am

Quote from: Nemesis on July 17, 2009, 07:13:43 pm
Link to full article

Quote
But no, apparently the publisher changed its mind about offering an electronic edition, and apparently Amazon, whose business lives and dies by publisher happiness, caved. It electronically deleted all books by this author from people’s Kindles and credited their accounts for the price.

When Big Brother struck what books did they take? 1984 and Animal Farm. It seems some purchases are more equal than others.

Big Brother? I object to the inflammatory characterization of writers and their works or the inflammatory characterization of any artist trying to control their works.

They sold the work, people paid good money for it, then had a legal purchases taken away. Reversing a legal purchases is wrong. Be like someone saying, hey you know that Guitar you bought, the "artist" that built it decieded you can't have it anymore.

Does DRM stand for Digitally revokable media?

Of course this is one reason I only get real paper book, harder to take them away from me. I have never liked the Kindle methology.

Nemesis · « **Reply #4 on:** July 18, 2009, 01:53:10 pm »

Quote from: toasty0 on July 18, 2009, 10:05:55 am

Big Brother? I object to the inflammatory characterization of writers and their works or the inflammatory characterization of any artist trying to control their works.

Big Brother in this instance = Amazon.

George Orwell had nothing to do with appropriating the paid for works. Amazon should have negotiated to 1/ pay damages to the current copyright holder 2/ protect their customers.

Dash Jones · « **Reply #5 on:** July 18, 2009, 03:25:02 pm »

Quote from: toasty0 on July 18, 2009, 10:05:55 am

Quote from: Nemesis on July 17, 2009, 07:13:43 pm
Link to full article

Quote
But no, apparently the publisher changed its mind about offering an electronic edition, and apparently Amazon, whose business lives and dies by publisher happiness, caved. It electronically deleted all books by this author from people’s Kindles and credited their accounts for the price.

When Big Brother struck what books did they take? 1984 and Animal Farm. It seems some purchases are more equal than others.

Big Brother? I object to the inflammatory characterization of writers and their works or the inflammatory characterization of any artist trying to control their works.

George Orwell is dead. How is he involved in this in any fashion. In fact he's been dead over 50 years. If they hadn't changed the copy right and trademark rules, or used the ones at his death, at this point I think his works may even have been public domaine (if they aren't that is).

I think it's pretty odd, if they had made a mistake at a normal booksellers and released a book early or when they weren't supposed to, they wouldn't have snuck into someone's house and stolen it back, even if they leave a check that's normally called...STEALING.

That is, if I go and take your car, even if I leave a check for how much I think it is worth to you (let's say I leave you a check for 5000...) it's still considered stealing.

Of course I suppose it isn't the same thing if it's as people stated, with the kindle you are just paying for access into the system, and not to actually own anything, in which case I would suppose it's more like paying to be part of a carpool in the morning and they just decide not to pick you up anymore or something like that.

Still, not the nicest thing, and could be considered questionable as you are stuck there trying to figure out how to get to work after you realize what they've done.

On a separate note...isn't DRM what Microsoft have and what many of the Movie makers want on Windows to check for pirated stuff...and Kindle is relying on something slightly different in their case?

marstone · « **Reply #6 on:** July 18, 2009, 06:37:54 pm »

from my understanding from how Kindle works is you pay a fee to have access to lots of stuff (newspapers, etc), but you can also buy books that are downloaded to your Kindle to read. They keep a database of who bought what so you don't have to keep the copy on your Kindle (saving space) and can reload it whenever you want to read it.

But as I don't own one, and like paper in my hand, I am not for sure.

Nemesis · « **Reply #7 on:** July 18, 2009, 09:18:37 pm »

Quote from: Dash Jones on July 18, 2009, 03:25:02 pm

On a separate note...isn't DRM what Microsoft have and what many of the Movie makers want on Windows to check for pirated stuff...and Kindle is relying on something slightly different in their case?

DRM is not restricted to Microsoft.

Bluray for example has a system whereby they can revoke your players "right" to play the disks of a specific provider. You could for example insert a Paramount disk and find that machine will no longer play Paramount Bluray disks. The only cure you have is to buy a new player, then have to do it again when it's rights to play some of your disks is revoked. Apparently this happened recently with the WinDVD software.

knightstorm · « **Reply #8 on:** July 31, 2009, 02:05:03 pm »

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2009/07/27/daily58.html

Quote

A Michigan high-school student named Justin Gawronski is suing Amazon.com Inc. — claiming that when the online retailer recently deleted the George Orwell novel “1984” from his Kindle reader, it also caused his “copious notes” to be “rendered useless.”

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Seattle, seeks class action status and unspecified damages. According to the lawsuit, Gawronski bought a 99-cent digital copy of “1984” for his Kindle 2 for a summer homework assignment and later saw it “vanish before his very eyes.” For more on a high-school student suing Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN) in federal court, see TechFlash here.

Pestalence_XC · « **Reply #9 on:** July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm »

I still can't believe people are stupid enough to pay for stuff like this..

the book 1984.. Free download

http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt

the book Animal Farm

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79a/

Don't idiots know how to use a search engine..

Amazon is not violatin DRM.. basically the are saying don't use that crappy Ebook service, use a search engine.. and they refunded people their money for a work that is a free download..

DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

for people above using an analogy about your car being stolen..

In this case your car was stolen, you were given your maney back from the purchase of that car.. and then when you took the time to go out to different car lots (search engine) you found that the car weas free all along.

Everyone Jumps on the DRM band wagon.. Guess what.. out of all the years of dealing with media on the internet.. I have yet to find anything DRM prevented me from viewing or listening to..

Nemesis · « **Reply #10 on:** July 31, 2009, 09:27:43 pm »

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm

DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

If it wasn't for the DRM Amazon could not have removed the books and caused the problem. That makes it clearly a DRM issue.

toasty0 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 31, 2009, 10:28:26 pm »

Quote from: Nemesis on July 31, 2009, 09:27:43 pm

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm
DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

If it wasn't for the DRM Amazon could not have removed the books and caused the problem. That makes it clearly a DRM issue.

Do not adjust your set. We control your horizontal and we control your vertical...

Pestalence_XC · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2009, 11:22:44 pm »

Quote from: Nemesis on July 31, 2009, 09:27:43 pm

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm
DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

If it wasn't for the DRM Amazon could not have removed the books and caused the problem. That makes it clearly a DRM issue.

What I am trying to find out is how is it a DRM issue when the books are free to everyone with half a brain to use a search engine..

Amazon recalled the book through a service that people agreed to the terms of service before they used it.. People got their money back, which was solicitated most probably against the publishers Terms of Service, and the media that was paid for was recalled, most probably due to a violation of TOS , and as such Amason pulled the ill be gotten material back the only way they had legal recourse to do so.. however the harm is not present as people have their money back and the works have been free public access on the net for at least 7 years...

so you tell me.. is recalling and refunding a product that is free elsewhere a problem of DRM or is it being used to protect consumers (not just Publishers / Artists)?

FPF-Tobin Dax · « **Reply #13 on:** August 01, 2009, 08:56:41 am »

Quote from: toasty0 on July 31, 2009, 10:28:26 pm

Quote from: Nemesis on July 31, 2009, 09:27:43 pm
Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm
DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

If it wasn't for the DRM Amazon could not have removed the books and caused the problem. That makes it clearly a DRM issue.

Do not adjust your set. We control your horizontal and we control your vertical...

Outer Limits, not twilight zone.......sorry Rod...

toasty0 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 01, 2009, 09:26:23 am »

Quote from: FPF-Tobin Dax on August 01, 2009, 08:56:41 am

Quote from: toasty0 on July 31, 2009, 10:28:26 pm
Quote from: Nemesis on July 31, 2009, 09:27:43 pm
Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm
DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

If it wasn't for the DRM Amazon could not have removed the books and caused the problem. That makes it clearly a DRM issue.

Do not adjust your set. We control your horizontal and we control your vertical...

Outer Limits, not twilight zone.......sorry Rod...

Meh! Conceptually the same.

Sirgod · « **Reply #15 on:** August 01, 2009, 12:38:39 pm »

Well, I have to give Amazon some credit, they actually did an apology that sounds and reads like one, So unlike other apologies we should have got from other entities.

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

------------------

Stephen

Nemesis · « **Reply #16 on:** August 02, 2009, 06:34:33 am »

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 11:22:44 pm

What I am trying to find out is how is it a DRM issue when the books are free to everyone with half a brain to use a search engine..

The fact that the same book may have been available (Legally? Maybe not) does not change the fact that DRM was used.

Blaming the victim is a discredited legal theory Pestalance. "Look at how she was dressed, she was ASKING to be raped". It just doesn't fly with the courts or with me.

toasty0 · « **Reply #17 on:** August 02, 2009, 09:00:13 am »

Quote from: Nemesis on August 02, 2009, 06:34:33 am

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 11:22:44 pm
What I am trying to find out is how is it a DRM issue when the books are free to everyone with half a brain to use a search engine..

The fact that the same book may have been available (Legally? Maybe not) does not change the fact that DRM was used.

Blaming the victim is a discredited legal theory Pestalance. "Look at how she was dressed, she was ASKING to be raped". It just doesn't fly with the courts or with me.

On the other hand Nem, ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law either...and stupidity is not a protected state of mind either.

Nemesis · « **Reply #18 on:** August 02, 2009, 09:18:14 am »

Quote from: toasty0 on August 02, 2009, 09:00:13 am

On the other hand Nem, ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law either...and stupidity is not a protected state of mind either.

What law did those who had their books taken away without notice break? Note they did not violate copyright.

Sirgod · « **Reply #19 on:** August 02, 2009, 11:46:23 am »

Theft for one.

This should have went to court, to set a precedent. EVEN, if someone had stolen property in there home, The police still have to get a warrant etc. etc. there are protocols to follow with the justice system.

Amazon basically did an OJ.

Stephen

EmeraldEdge · « **Reply #20 on:** August 02, 2009, 12:43:36 pm »

Well, I love the feel of a book but I had kind of started to eye this little gadget. Kind of an interesting novelty, but I can guarantee they aren't going to be selling me one anytime soon now. I have never been a fan of any of the "we hold the product (usually video) and you can see it anytime you want. It's just like owning it." stuff. If they can remove it remotely then you don't really own it, you're just leasing it for a small one time fee revocable at their discretion and leisure. I always thought it was bogus in the case of the videos too, because what if the company goes under or stops offering the service. You're stiff out of luck, I'd imagine.

Nemesis · « **Reply #21 on:** August 02, 2009, 05:46:10 pm »

Quote from: Sirgod on August 02, 2009, 11:46:23 am

Theft for one.

Stephen

The customer bought from a "reputable" dealer and in no way did they commit a theft.

Sirgod · « **Reply #22 on:** August 02, 2009, 07:01:28 pm »

Oh no, not the customer bro.

What amazon did was theft, and they are the OJ in this case.

Had they followed criminal law, they would have been prosecuted for selling stolen property, and then the courts could have ordered the books removed.

Had it been an individual selling stolen goods, you bet his ass would be in jail.

Stephen

Nemesis · « **Reply #23 on:** August 02, 2009, 07:15:08 pm »

Quote from: Sirgod on August 02, 2009, 07:01:28 pm

Oh no, not the customer bro.

What amazon did was theft, and they are the OJ in this case.

Had they followed criminal law, they would have been prosecuted for selling stolen property, and then the courts could have ordered the books removed.

Had it been an individual selling stolen goods, you bet his ass would be in jail.

Stephen

As I understood it Amazon had it provided by someone who claimed to have the right to do so. If so then at most it could be shown that they didn't do their "due diligence" to check out his (or her) assertion as to the rights.

Sirgod · « **Reply #24 on:** August 02, 2009, 07:52:21 pm »

I agree. It lead to them selling stolen goods. Just like the guy who was selling TV's he said fell off a truck.

Anyways, Amazon did wrong, but I did like there apology, It actually reads like one.

Stephen

Age · « **Reply #25 on:** August 07, 2009, 04:05:32 pm »

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm

I still can't believe people are stupid enough to pay for stuff like this..

the book 1984.. Free download

http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt

the book Animal Farm

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79a/

Don't idiots know how to use a search engine..

No they don't that is why they are idiots why do ppl need to use this anyway just go to you pulic library or book store.

Dash Jones · « **Reply #26 on:** August 07, 2009, 06:49:15 pm »

Does Kindle read text document like the Sony ereader?

knightstorm · « **Reply #27 on:** August 07, 2009, 07:09:11 pm »

Quote from: Dash Jones on August 07, 2009, 06:49:15 pm

Does Kindle read text document like the Sony ereader?

File formats
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Kindle#File_formats

Quote

The original Kindle supports only unprotected Mobipocket books (MOBI, PRC), plain text files (TXT), and Amazon's proprietary, DRM-restricted format (AZW). It does not fully support Portable Document Format (PDF), but Amazon provides "experimental" conversion to the native AZW format,[26] with the caveat that not all PDFs may format correctly.[27] Amazon offers an email-based service that will convert JPEG, GIF, PNG, and BMP graphics to AZW.[28] Amazon will also convert HTML pages and Microsoft Word (DOC) documents through the same email-based mechanism, which will send a Kindle-formatted file to the device directly for $0.15 per MB or to a personal e-mail account for free. Users may also convert PDF and other files to the first-generation Kindle's supported formats using third-party software. The original Kindle supports audio in the form of MP3s and Audible audiobooks (versions 2, 3 and 4), which must be transferred to the Kindle over USB or on an SD card.

Initially, Kindle 1 only supported the ISO 8859-1 (Latin 1) character set for its content; Unicode characters and non-Western characters were not supported. The firmware update of February 2009 added support for additional character sets including ISO 8859-16.

Kindle 2 added support for Audible Enhanced (AAX) format, but dropped support for Audible versions 2 and 3. Using the experimental web browser, it is possible to download books directly on the Kindle (in MOBI, PRC and TXT formats only). Hyperlinks in a Mobipocket file can be used to download e-books[29] but cannot be used to reference books stored in the Kindle's memory. Kindle DX added native support for PDF files.

Dash Jones · « **Reply #28 on:** August 09, 2009, 07:26:52 pm »

So basically Kindle STINKS...I suppose the only reason Kindle is doing so well in comparison to the Sony Ereader which reads PDF and Text (which the Kindle can read) and other documents without having to put it through a web conversion process is because it's being pushed via Amazon already.

knightstorm · « **Reply #29 on:** August 09, 2009, 09:44:57 pm »

Personally, I don't see why anyone would buy either when you could just use any smartphone or pda to read the non-restricted content.

marstone · « **Reply #30 on:** August 10, 2009, 01:31:50 am »

Quote from: knightstorm on August 09, 2009, 09:44:57 pm

Personally, I don't see why anyone would buy either when you could just use any smartphone or pda to read the non-restricted content.

well, I hate trying to read on those tiny screens you get on a smart phone or PDA. A PDF file (or a book page) doesn't look right and can be hard to read if you have a graphic to reference. Having a book reader the size of a book would be nice.

I'm saving my caps for when one I really like comes out. 'til then, paper for me.

Nemesis · « **Reply #31 on:** August 10, 2009, 06:46:25 am »

Quote from: knightstorm on August 09, 2009, 09:44:57 pm

Personally, I don't see why anyone would buy either when you could just use any smartphone or pda to read the non-restricted content.

I've read books on my PDA but the screen is inadequate. 320x480 and I have to set it to constantly scroll as there is too little displayed at a time. Can't read it outdoors. Very hard on the battery life.

Nemesis · « **Reply #32 on:** September 07, 2009, 09:07:44 pm »

Update:

Link to full article

Quote

Kindle customers who saw George Orwell's Nineteen-Eighty-Four disappear from their screens have received an apology from Amazon's CEO, along with a copy of the book or $30 of restitution.

Amazon sent out the apology, signed by CEO Jeff Bezos, saying the way they handled the situation was "stupid, thoughtless and painfully out of line with our principles". Customers are offered the option of having the book reinstated, or an Amazon voucher to the value of $30, by way of apology.

candle_86 · « **Reply #33 on:** September 07, 2009, 09:41:20 pm »

Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 11:22:44 pm

Quote from: Nemesis on July 31, 2009, 09:27:43 pm
Quote from: Cptn_Pestalence_XC on July 31, 2009, 08:32:45 pm
DRM has absolutely nothing to do with this..

If it wasn't for the DRM Amazon could not have removed the books and caused the problem. That makes it clearly a DRM issue.

What I am trying to find out is how is it a DRM issue when the books are free to everyone with half a brain to use a search engine..

Amazon recalled the book through a service that people agreed to the terms of service before they used it.. People got their money back, which was solicitated most probably against the publishers Terms of Service, and the media that was paid for was recalled, most probably due to a violation of TOS , and as such Amason pulled the ill be gotten material back the only way they had legal recourse to do so.. however the harm is not present as people have their money back and the works have been free public access on the net for at least 7 years...

so you tell me.. is recalling and refunding a product that is free elsewhere a problem of DRM or is it being used to protect consumers (not just Publishers / Artists)?

Its still DRM, free or not, sevral old games are free today as the publisher and game company vanished leaving the software license defunct, but you still pay for these from some sites, lets say you bought an old dos game form the early 80;s thats freely avaibile online, you downloaded it into your computer system, then one day they say we cant let you keep this then pop goes what you paid for. Money back or not does not mean no harm done.

People with bad eyesight use ebooks because you can enlage the text so its easier to read than the normal book. Some books are not forsale in nonebook form anymore, try to find some old Star Trek novels these days, the easiest way is ebook. As someone else posted a kid was using it for homework and it deleted his notes also, this cant be covered by money. Or if there isnt a local bookstore around, I used to live in a town with only a Wal-Mart 15miles away the nearest bookstore was 130 miles away, to replace recalled book costs more than what they refunded because of gas. So yes this is DRM, they recalled the ebook because there afraid people will share this specfic recently published version. Remember a book or other written work is copyrighted for 50 years from last revision, so as long as revisions kept being made copyright stays. Now these free ebooks could be revision 1, but the amazon books revision 6 or 7, with spelling corrections not caught in revision 1, yes this does happen, could include illistrations not included in revisision 1 or any other stuff. So this is DRM on this publishers revision of the work, so there specific version is harder to pirate.

News:

Topic: The latest example of why I hate DRM (Read 9531 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: The latest example of why I hate DRM (Read 9531 times)