

You don't own your Kindle books, Amazon reminds customer - geekam
http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/gadgets/you-dont-own-your-kindle-books-amazon-reminds-customer-f1C6626211

======
anigbrowl
This story is from October 2012. It's not very obvious from the NBC website,
but if you follow the link to BoingBoing it is. I seem to remember there had
been some change/improvement in Amazon's TOS over this issue sometime in the
last 18 months, though I don't recall when exactly so I might be wrong.

I understand old stuff getting posted because many websites recycle non-
current stories automatically as 'you might also like...' linkbait, but it is
worth checking the date of something before you post.

------
shmerl
Sure. Don't buy e-books from DRM afflicted distributors. There were enough
stories that anyone should learn that lesson by now. And that applies to
everything, not just e-books.

By buying from them you only help proliferating that sickness.

------
coin
-1 for nbcnews disabling pinchzoom on mobile devices, and rendering text on only the left 5/8 of the screen.

------
merryandrew
Related: [http://www.quora.com/Do-my-heirs-inherit-my-Kindle-ebooks-
or...](http://www.quora.com/Do-my-heirs-inherit-my-Kindle-ebooks-or-other-
restricted-ebooks-when-I-die)

~~~
merryandrew
From the terms, here:
[http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=2...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201014950)

------
betterunix
I have to wonder if the authors who demanded DRM from Amazon have figured out
that this is the kind of behavior that drives people to download books
illegally, or if they still fail to see the connection.

~~~
shmerl
Probably most of the time it's not demanded by authors, but by legacy
publishers. They have some distortion in their mind, which was already
compared to Lysenkoism:

[http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-
blog...](http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blogs/cory-
doctorow/article/50413-with-a-little-help-digital-lysenkoism.html)

~~~
betterunix
Perhaps, but then I am left wondering about newly written books -- why are the
authors continuing to endorse DRM? Why are the authors continuing to do
business with the publishers who demand it?

~~~
shmerl
It's not about new vs old books, it's about forward thinking vs backward
thinking publishers.

I.e. the story goes like this:

When authors write books, and want to publish them, most of the time they has
no means to do it. So they look for publishers to fund that. If publishers are
thick-sculled and backward thinking (i.e. afflicted by DRM Lysenkoism), or
otherwise somehow crooked, they demand DRM to be part of the deal. Authors
might not like that, but they think they have no choice etc. If publishers are
normal on the other hand, they don't care about DRM. Crowdfunding often helps
to prevent all this mess, and it's starting to play a bigger role in
publishing, not just for books, but for other media (video, games, etc.) which
also is often afflicted by DRM because of the legacy publishers. Notably,
practically no self publishing authors ever use DRM.

As with many areas, old publishers for some reason most of the time are
afflicted by DRM. Newer ones - less so. I can't explain the exact correlation,
since DRM is really such a stupid thing than anyone with common sense would
know that it's bad for business. More than often my feeling is that DRM is
used for stupid (Lysenkoism) or side sinister and selfish reasons (covering
one's incompetence, controlling technology progress, spying on users or what
not).

------
userbinator
That reminds me of this which happened a few years ago:
[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/18/amazon_removes_1984_...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/18/amazon_removes_1984_from_kindle/)

------
marcus_holmes
yes I do. I rip them off the device as soon as they download and store a copy
on my PC.

~~~
shmerl
That might help preserving the backup, but that contributes to the bigger
problem (since you are supporting those who proliferate DRM). Voting with your
wallet and avoiding distributors who insult users with this unethical garbage
is a better approach.

~~~
betterunix
Yeah but then you are forced to make a choice: avoid authors who fail to
provide non-restricted books, or download books illegally.

~~~
shmerl
It's even better that way, since you'll support sane authors and publishers
who don't use DRM. I see no problem avoiding others. It's like global
pollution. One can choose to avoid those who heavily contribute to it and
prefer those who don't.

~~~
marcus_holmes
DRM isn't effective. Sooner or later the businesses involved are going to
discover this. DRM doesn't actually inconvenience me (I'd be taking a backup
anyway) so I don't mind publishers wasting their time pushing it. If DRM was
effective and got in my way then I'd pirate their books; not really from an
ethical stance, but purely because of convenience. Eventually the penny is
going to drop and they'll realise that DRM _causes_ piracy instead of
preventing it and they'll stop using it.

------
kzrdude
Take that thing to the Consumer Protection Ombudsman in Norway

~~~
jrockway
Seems like it was bought in the UK, from Amazon.co.uk, so what relevance would
Norway have? They're not even in the EU.

(If I import some random device from China, I don't complain to the FTC when
it doesn't work.)

