Amazon needs a bit o' slappin....
Oct. 22nd, 2012 12:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
seawaspTake a look at this.
Short version: Woman has Kindle and many Amazon books. One day, Kindle turns out to be wiped, account is closed. Amazon claims her account was "connected" to some other account which was closed for undetailed reasons. Refuses to explain, refuses to reopen account, stonewalls on further inquiry.
This is completely unacceptable behavior. If you take my money and close my account, the LEAST you owe me is (A) an explanation for your actions, and (B) to let me keep the books you ALREADY let me purchase, or (C) to refund ALL of the money that you took from me for the books I have on my Kindle.
Speaking as an author, I (like
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
burger_eater who called my attention to this fiasco) make a bunch of money through Amazon (even though, as of yet, there are no Baen e-versions on Amazon, my paper books sell lots of copies through them). I can't very well shoot myself in the foot by NOT selling through them (even if we were to assume that Baen would let me MAKE such a decision, which they wouldn't).But I'm also a customer. Amazon's been my one-stop entertainment shop for years now.
This kind of behavior SERIOUSLY makes me want to reconsider. It *DEFINITELY* makes me very reluctant to buy a Kindle -- something I was *going* to put on my wishlist for this year.
Not now. Why should I? Obviously Amazon feels that any books I bought would actually be theirs, and mine to access only on their sufferance and good will. If I'm going to get a tablet-thingie, I guess I have to go with iPad. At least that device has more utility, and isn't under the control of a company that feels shutting down a customer, taking their paid-for materials, and then refusing to explain their actions is a perfectly good idea.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:21 pm (UTC)If they're doing stuff they shouldn't, then the publishers should be beating them with brooms.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 09:52 pm (UTC)I wonder why some, even on BoingBoing, assume the user must have violated policy and isn't saying, as if Amazon couldn't ban someone by mistake due to data errors (see below).*
It's equally possible Amazon aggressively bans and finds it cheaper to write off mistakes than investigate them (at least if the customer doesn't spend enough). The refusal to provide key info on the alleged violation indicates customer service aimed at stonewalling more than resolution - which is a not uncommon policy for big data companies.
This is one of my big problems with the DRM future terms of service increasingly allow them to take your money and deny service almost at whim.
*Remember Amazon was sued after it sold an Australian edition of 1984 in the wrong regions then fixed their error by wiping Kindles. There was the data snafu that marked all LGBT material as adult and de-listed it en masse.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 12:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:26 pm (UTC)I was burned when Gemstar dropped the Rocket format, but fortunately only about a dozen of my books had DRM. (The others having been purchased from Baen and Fictionwise.)
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:59 pm (UTC)There are other conveniences to loading stuff into Calibre -- when a KIndle dies, it's *so* much easier to load its successor a few dozen files at a time via Calibre instead of one at a time via Amazon. Ditto if I decide I want to reread a series, or the like.
(OTOH, there are other downsides to Kindles, e.g. I'm very serious about it being WHEN a Kindle dies.)
In a way it's worse than being illegal; every three years the library of congress (not congress itself, which is a different rant) decides what the exceptions to the DRM statute are. Currently the ebook exception is:
(6) Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book’s read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format.
How would you *know* whether breaking the DRM on a given work of fiction is legal or not?
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 05:57 pm (UTC)These cases should be cited whenever someone argues there doesn't need to be any legal option to remove DRM.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 08:39 pm (UTC)Oh, there are alternatives.
(Seriously, your plan to get away from draconian control of your device is to go to Apple?)
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 08:48 pm (UTC)I have to deal with that at work, I'm not touching it with a 60 foot pole at home.
I already USE Apple products and the iPad is compatible with my other stuff.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 09:27 pm (UTC)True story: one of my housemates has an iPad. Getting the iPad to print -- to a printer that is on the short list of printers that iPads can officially print to -- took many hours, and it eventually required two different Windows machines to make it work. (OK, technically we could have done it with only one Windows machine.) I'm not impressed with Apple.
However, if you prefer the Apple interface over the Windows interface, then you would definitely prefer the iPad over the Surface.
I think, when you're looking at tablet-style devices, you're basically looking at a matrix: on one axis is which brand you're comfortable with/loyal to, and on the other axis is what level of device you want:
- A single-purpose e-reader; e.g, the e-ink devices like (some) Kindles and Nooks. The advantage is that they're generally pretty cheap, and for reading books specifically I much prefer the e-ink screen. The disadvantage is that reading e-books is about all they're good for.
- A fancy e-reader slash crappy tablet; e.g., the higher-end Kindles and Nooks. You get a color LCD screen, which is faster and sexier than an ink screen, but sucks battery faster and (in my opinion) is less comfortable for long-term reading. You also get to run some apps and games, but they're not very good general-purpose devices. They cost more than e-ink devices, but less than real tablets.
- A real tablet; e.g., an iPad, a Surface, or some of the Android devices. You can use these devices for a whole lot of things; reading e-books is only a fraction of their utility. On the other hand, they cost significantly more; in some cases, they overlap cost-wise with the cheaper laptops.
Oh, I guess there's a third axis: form-factor. Are you looking for a seven-ish-inch device that you can carry in a large pocket, or a ten-ish-inch device that has a lot more screen real estate, but you can't carry in a pocket?
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 12:12 am (UTC)Me, I always found the Apple products vastly more intuitive and easy to use -- and since I have to use both I don't think that's just an artifact of "being used to something"; before I used Apple I used Atari and then had to use both Mac and Windows in school.
"Printing"? Do people still do that? I mean, in the real world, outside of offices?
A dedicated cheap E-reader wouldn't be bad, but I expect color where the original had it, so I'm already into the Kindle Fire territory. So a Tablet looks like the right choice.
"Carry in a pocket" I already do with my phone (and that's about the largest thing I can figure on getting in a pocket -- seven inches in a pocket???), but there's no way I could read anything of any length on that. I was thinking of something the linear dimensions of my laptop but vastly thinner and lighter.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 12:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 06:50 pm (UTC)Then this is not for you.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 10:05 pm (UTC)I still avoid "buying" e-books from Amazon though.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 12:13 am (UTC)Baen for the Win
Date: 2012-10-22 08:39 pm (UTC)I think almost every ebook I've ever brought I got from Baen's service. I also incessantly recommend them to friends, with 'They don't use any DRM' as a major selling point.
The problem with Amazon's behaviour is, as several other people have pointed out in the comments, is that they have ended up actively, though quite unintentionality, encouraging piracy.
At the best, people will want to strip the DRM off anything they buy off them, and back them up to other locations. At the worst, they will do what the music industry has done, and totally destroy the concept that "Paying Amazon money for a book gives you any ownership over the copy you got." and at that point the moral reason for people to pay for books starts getting iffy.
I keep really hoping the Baen model will take off more. I've gotten several of my friends reading more books via them. Especially the ability to point somebody to the free library.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 10:07 pm (UTC)The non-DRM model is slowly picking up steam, particularly for Science fiction and Fantasy books.
No-DRM for the Win
Date: 2012-10-22 10:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 11:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 12:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 08:42 pm (UTC)I'm really sorry that happened with Amazon, since you were considering getting a Kindle.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 10:44 pm (UTC)Not that I buy DRM'd books very often. My reader is full of Project Gutenberg and Baen ebooks; there's only a handful of books I've bought with DRM attached.
Also, it's always legal (in the US) to make backups for archival purposes. Even if you have to strip the DRM to do so.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 11:02 pm (UTC)Lord Hewart from "Rex v Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy"
I have no way of knowing if the person is guilty or innocent of a violation of the Terms And Conditions. But it is pretty clear that any person who IS innocent in a situation such as this really gets the shaft. One would hope that such Death Penalty measures would only be applied when they were DAMN SURE that they were in the right - but if they really were DAMN SURE there was a violation, providing an explanation should not be difficult or put them at risk of legal liability. So it really COMES ACROSS as if they are NOT really sure. Whether this impression is accurate or not, it seems a terrible blow to their public image. Sort of a reversal to "It is better that 10 innocent people be punished rather than let 1 guilty party escape punishment."
=======================================================================================
You said "Obviously Amazon feels that any books I bought would actually be theirs, and mine to access only on their sufferance and good will."
Yes, precisely. Ever since books were invented we have had the idea that we bought a physical object and it was ours to do with as we please. Read it, sell it, loan it to friends, burn it - whatever. We (as a society) are really, REALLY having a difficult time adjusting to the sea-change that we are not buying a book, we are buying a license to electronically read their copy. It might help if we started wording things that way. Not "I bought a book" (which carries all the old connotations of ownership) but "I licensed reading rights to a book."
I get around this by simply not owning any ebooks. Yes, I've seen that there are ways to get around DRM. I prefer to simply "Vote with my money". People selling physical books meet my needs under conditions I find satisfactory. They get my business. People selling licences (that can be revoked under their terms, without explanation) do not.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 11:04 pm (UTC)Also, more accurate version of what happened here: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2012/10/rights-you-have-no-right-to-your-ebooks/index.htm
They did not delete her books. Her Kindle broke, and now they won't let her redownload the books, because her account has been suspended for "abuses" probably as a result of someone else's actions after she gave away an old linked-to-her-account Kindle.
This is really more an issue with territorial copyright laws being idiotic rather than Amazon having to enforce them, IMO.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 06:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 11:34 pm (UTC)Frankly, DRM needs to be greatly modified to be acceptable. Being able to delete the content is bad enough. Being able to delete annotations is unacceptable. And deleting content needs to require a refund.
In cases like the one above, where it was Amazon's error, they should instead be required to pay the royalties for *their* mistake so that the customer retains the item they purchased in good faith.
Now as for this incident, I hope she can get the EFF or the like involved. Amazon (and other vendors selling DRMed material) need to be beaten upon until they understand that the buyers have rights and that the vendors will not be allowed to use contracts of adhesion that violate those rights.
BTW, what makes you think apple wouldn't do that. Check into the sorts of things that happen with the iTunes store.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-22 11:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 12:12 am (UTC)I used to hate e-readers completely, and then I started using my MP4 player for an e-reader. I still prefer dead tree versions.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 07:04 am (UTC)[* I like people whose response to the proprietary format licence nonsense that says you're not allowed to have Their format on the same device as Our format was... to make it easy to flash the firmware between slightly different versions of their OS, one for Mobi and one for Sony (IIRC).]
no subject
Date: 2012-10-23 04:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-27 07:46 pm (UTC)