
Outlawed by Amazon DRM - paulsilver
http://www.bekkelund.net/2012/10/22/outlawed-by-amazon-drm/
======
cs702
Could you ever imagine a local retailer in your area breaking and entering
into your home, taking away all your books, and then not giving you a
straightforward explanation as to why they did so? Me neither. Breaking and
entering into someone else's physical property, and talking away their
physical possessions without explanation is so obviously wrong and illegal!

Yet that's pretty much what Amazon did to this poor woman, except in the
digital realm: Amazon 'broke and entered' into her Kindle, took away all her
books, and then did not give her a straightforward explanation as to why they
did so.

More alarmingly, Amazon did this with impunity, because this woman never
really owned "her" books or, for that matter, anything else she "purchased" on
"her" Kindle. In the digital realm, what Amazon did to this woman is
_perfectly legal_.

Legal or not, this looks, smells, and feels _so obviously wrong,_ it ought to
be illegal.

~~~
joshnerius
I've often wondered about the viability of students purchasing or renting
textbooks for the Kindle. Just imagine the panic/terror that would ensue if a
student's collection of textbooks just disappeared in the middle of a
semester.

If my collection of novels disappears, I'm inconvenienced. If my collection of
textbooks disappears, my academic progress is severely jeopardized. Both seem
extremely wrong as you mention, but I see potential for situations that are
life-ruiningly wrong.

~~~
MrMember
When Amazon remotely deleted 1984 from people's Kindles a few years ago a
student lost the digital notes he had been creating as he was reading it for a
class. He ended up suing Amazon, but I have no idea if it was ever resolved or
if it's still ongoing.

~~~
dtparr
Amazon settled fairly quickly:
[http://arstechnica.com/business/2009/10/amazon-stipulates-
te...](http://arstechnica.com/business/2009/10/amazon-stipulates-terms-of-
book-deletion-via-1984-settlement/)

The most interesting/relevant bit from the article "In it, Amazon's attorneys
agreed to legally binding terms that describe its content deletion policy.
When it comes to blog and periodical content, as well as software, Amazon
retains the right to perform a remote delete. But when it comes to books,
deletions will only occur under a limited number of circumstances: failed
credit card transactions, judicial orders, malware, or the permission of the
user."

~~~
tomerv
Perhaps I'm not reading this correctly, but it looks to me like Amazon does
not hold the right to delete books in the case of a ToS abuse, which means
that they shouldn't have deleted the books in this case.

~~~
dtparr
I would have thought the same. Perhaps the 'Amazon' that is bound under this
settlement is a different corporate entity as the 'Amazon' in this case. E.g.
Amazon.com vs. Amazon.co.uk

~~~
rmc
As a tangent, I hate how trademark law protects the "Amazon" brand for book
sellers, but there are 2 different companies. I think that if the company
wants to keep a trademark, then any company that uses/is licenced that
trademark is legally counted as the same company. This way Joe Soap, upon
seeing the "Amazon" trademark, is not able to screwed around by corporate
structure shenanigans. Or Amazon Ltd. have the choice of giving up the
trademark.

~~~
stickfigure
I doubt that would matter in this case. Different laws apply to different
jurisdictions. The fact that Amazon US and Amazon UK are two different
companies is a red herring; a purchase in one jurisdiction may entail
different rights than a purchase in other jurisdictions, even from the same
company.

------
techsupporter
Tangentially related, I am getting very, very tired of "customer service"
departments using phrases like:

"While we are unable to provide detailed information on how we link related
accounts, please know that we have reviewed your account on the basis of the
information provided and regret to inform you that it will not be reopened."

This happens more frequently: Google says this all the time, based on posts
here; Amazon now does the same thing; even apartment rental companies will say
"you've been turned down on the basis of this report that we don't know the
contents of."

If your company can't reveal specific reasons or steps behind why an action
was taken, DON'T TAKE THAT ACTION. Even my credit card issuer will tell me
exactly why my card was flagged and they deal with ACTUAL MONEY. All these
statements do is infuriate customers, create bad press, and drive away other
customers. Scammers will just back up, look at their entire operation, and
hammer away again with 300 new accounts so all you've accomplished is pissing
off customers who want to do business with you.

~~~
oliwarner
Companies have privacy obligations. If they inaccurately link you to a
fraudulent user and then tell you all the activity of that fraudulent user,
they've probably just broken the law.

That's a specific example where it might not be legal but I agree that this is
widespread and there are lots of things in the real world where it would be
fine to tell you, but they choose not to. In my experience this is to protect
internal process (so you can't cite why they're idiots) or so that they can
sell you another product (credit score improvement, etc).

But I do agree, the withholding of detail is widespread to a point where it
suggests people just plain don't want to tell you anything.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
I'm not sure privacy obligations are really at play here. I can think of two
reasons they're taking the approach they're taking:

1) They don't want to get into a discussion which is likely to be time
consuming. It's not just innocent people who appeal these things, often the
most guilty are those who will most actively and vocally profess their
innocence (in some cases up to and including going to court over it - c.f. the
UK politician Jonathan Atkin).

The minute Amazon became willing to talk about this stuff they'd need a who
bunch more people to start looking into each one in detail, review every claim
and counter claim and so on, and they clearly don't think that that's a good
use of their money.

2) The sorts of things they'd likely have to reveal are going to be the sorts
of things people who are abusing the system want to know to get round it.
Doing this would make their job harder.

Not saying that it's right that they take this approach, just I can see the
reasons they do.

~~~
chris_wot
_The minute Amazon became willing to talk about this stuff they'd need a who
bunch more people to start looking into each one in detail, review every claim
and counter claim and so on, and they clearly don't think that that's a good
use of their money._

I for one would like them to start talking about this sort of thing, and
review these cases more thoroughly. After all, people paid good money to them
to read books. Books which they stole away from them. It seems unlikely that
Amazon provided a refund to the lady in question.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
I'm sure you would, but that's not much of a reason for Amazon to do so.

It's far easier and cheaper for them to ignore most cases and instead wait for
the few that blow up like this one and then look into them at that point. In
those cases if they think that they're even remotely in the wrong I suspect
that they'll reinstate the account, send their apologies, send the person in
question a gift voucher and get on with doing exactly what they were doing
before.

It's very easy to think that the sort of outcry that happens on HN, or even on
Twitter, reflects public opinion, but the reality is that this audience is
both far more aware of these events, and far more considered in their
reaction. The sad reality is that Amazon can get away with this sort of thing
because most Kindle users won't ever learn about it and even if they do won't
really understand what it means or change their behaviour.

~~~
chris_wot
Well there's a cynical view of how to deal with the general public.

~~~
brazzy
Unfortunately one that works - mainly because the general public's behaviour
is driven by attention to news stories rather than informed choice.

------
cletus
The fact that Amazon _can_ do this is obviously scary, particularly for those
with extensive Kindle libraries. Personally I love the _idea_ of ebooks but
the publishers are doing their best to kill this market (eg _Surface Detail_
in paperback is $6, as an ebook its $10 WTF?).

Now I can't speak to the truth of these claims. I have no inside knowledge but
I will say this: be skeptical of such stories. I have seen other stories like
this on HN where I have had some inside knowledge and I can tell you that
there have definitely been cases that vary between being one side of the story
to being a distortion of facts and events to being outright lies.

It's a common theme to have a post of "[BigCo] shut down my account for no
reason". I describe such stories as "unverifiable stories in which the poster
is a victim".

Like I said, this could all be exactly as the poster claims but it might not
be as well. It could be as simple as the person having the same name as
someone who got blocked in the US. Who knows? Amazon needs to be extremely
careful to be right in situations like this or they risk undermining the
ecosystem they've spent so long to create.

I don't mind buying Kindle novels because I tend to only ever read them once.
And if they were $6 (like the paperbacks often are) I'd view them as a
throwaway purchase.

But when it comes to technical books--books I'll often refer back to and that
can cost much more--I'll have to make sure I either only buy the PDF version
or I buy the PDF+mobi+epub upgrade from the publisher after buying the Kindle
book (2 thumbs up to publishers who do this BTW).

~~~
maratd
> be skeptical of such stories

Don't be too skeptical. Most of the people on HN had some big company
restrict/kill an account by some BigCo at some point.

Microsoft, Google, eBay, PayPal, Amazon, Facebook, etc. handle _millions_ of
accounts. They have automated filters that trigger based on specified criteria
that kill your account.

Their default response when this happens? Talk to legal. Well, more like write
to legal. They don't want to talk to you.

The problem? Microsoft has your operating system, Google has your email, eBay
has your stuff, PayPal has your money, Amazon has your books, Facebook has
your social life, etc.

And they can yank all of that away.

They don't even press any button. It's triggered automatically by criteria
they _never_ disclose beyond a vague TOS.

We need to push for a universal option for arbitration by a 3rd party
regarding these sorts of unilateral actions. If anything, it will probably
_reduce_ the support and legal costs for all of these companies.

~~~
edanm
"Don't be too skeptical. Most of the people on HN had some big company
restrict/kill an account by some BigCo at some point."

 _Most_? That is a pretty serious statement, and I really doubt you can back
it up. I don't have statistics on this and don't know where to look for them,
but I would guess that the numbers of HN'ers that have had an account closed
by a BigCo is actually much less than 1%, never mind more than 50%.

Am I grossly underestimating here? Keep in mind that these stories tend to be
very popular, so there could definitely be a lot more of these stories around
than is statistically correct.

P.s. As for one of cletus' point above, I've also noticed a few of these kinds
of points eventually bring out more details which tend _not_ to confirm the
events, as told in the original posts. Nothing specific to this case of
course, I've just caught myself a few times thinking "hmmm, looks like it
wasn't such a crystal-clear case of the company being wrong".

~~~
monkeypizza
My father had a 6 year old paid flickr account with 30k photos, 2m+ views,
shut down without warning or explanation.

It contained tons of original genealogical research, macro shots of plants,
photographs of family-related newspaper stories... And possibly some videos
with copyrighted music clips.

It's a shame how far we've fallen from traditional justice, which involves:

1\. right to confront your accuser, 2\. right to legal representation, 3\.
knowing the charges and evidence against you 4\. right to call witnesses and
present evidence 5\. judgement by your peers

I know, flickr owns the servers, they make the rules etc.

But as human beings, and as a company, I think it's a mistake for them to
behave this way.

The feeling of injustice is really powerful, and I think everyone would be
better served if companies didn't disregard it.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
I agree that they are making a big mistake causing those feelings of rage and
helplessnes.

But the rights you list are rights we have in court. We never had any right to
representation in an internal procedure of some private company.

If our access to essential digital facilities ends up being dominated by a
handful of global companies, these companies will be regulated like
traditional facilities if they don't start regulating themselves in a sensible
way very quickly.

Resolving conflicts, finding out what the truth is in a particular case, all
of that costs money. We will either pay it in taxes or as part of a purchase
we make.

~~~
monkeypizza
Flickr is yahoo's toy, if they get pissed off they can take it home and
deprive everyone of the game; it's still legal to be a jerk.

The whole world used to be that way, though - kings owned everything and if
you didn't like it, die - but it pissed people off so bad, they took back the
rights to what really was the king's property.

The real problem seems to be how easy it is to enter into extremely unjust
agreements online.

In the real world, it's not easy to sign a contract giving up all your future
rights - imagine if a car company tried to slip clauses into a car purchase
agreement giving them the right to take back the car without explanation at
any time. People would rebel. But online, people regularly click through
things just as bad as this.

People act like reputation pressure is enough to stop this - but in the real
world, not everyone is informed enough to keep up to date on every entity's
reputation, and in many places, communities have just taken the shortcut of
making certain types of deals illegal, at the expense of the freedom of the
seller to make that type of contract.

~~~
chris_wot
_In the real world, it's not easy to sign a contract giving up all your future
rights - imagine if a car company tried to slip clauses into a car purchase
agreement giving them the right to take back the car without explanation at
any time. People would rebel. But online, people regularly click through
things just as bad as this._

In Australia, consumer law prevents unfair terms in contracts by the simple
expedient of nullifying them.

~~~
bad_user
In general and not just in Australia, terms in contracts that are against the
law are null.

~~~
chris_wot
You misunderstand... This is if a contract provision that is _unfair_ , and
may not be illegal. A court can strike it down, depending on the
circumstances.

------
pwg
This post really brings into focus just how right Richard Stallman was when he
penned "The Right to Read":

<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html>

~~~
wtrk
Indeed. But don't expect the sort of person whose battle cry w/re to RS is
"But he's so unkempt!" to acknowledge that he tends to be correct.

~~~
jiggy2011
Do you think that if stallman cut his hair and put on a suit his message would
be better received?

~~~
belorn
No. Well dressed and much more groomed people has warned about obvious threat
in similar areas, and has also been equally ignored.

Its the problem of the frog and the slowly heating pot. The changes a just
slow enough that one can get used to the abuse. It will get worse. There is a
ton of stuff companies could be doing to increase revenue by abusing their
customers. When companies can view sold units as "theirs" to control, there is
little limit.

Car manufacturers really are the next area where I expect to see some heavy
changes really soon. Insurance companies really want data, and the
manufactures can easy supply it like how fast someone drives, and where they
go. In Sweden, this already almost happen in the form of an "voluntary" app.
Driving in privacy mode will soon include a heavty cost depending on which
insurance company you buy from. On the monopolistic side, there is nothing
really stopping car manufacturers to put DRM into the gas tank, so to only
"approved" gas sellers (those that pay the car manufacture) that has the right
to sell gas. DRM is already in place for parts, so its not that a big step.

~~~
maxerickson
The U.S. has pretty decent laws surrounding car parts. The manufacturers are
adding custom data to their vehicles, but the whole right to repair battle was
already fought back in the 90s, the independents won (with odb ii coming out
of it).

------
chanux
I e-mailed amazon using a feedback form[1]. following is what I wrote. I
appreciate if other kindle owners can do the same to help Linn and for the
greater good.

Dear Amazon,

Your service was really nice to me so far. But I happened to read a news that
was not comforting. Following is a link to the story.
<http://www.bekkelund.net/2012/10/22/outlawed-by-amazon-drm/>

This makes me hesitant about making any future purchases. I understand your
right to act against any abuse but I also believe that users have a right know
what was really going on, especially when they are being totally banished.

This email is to direct your attention towards the problem so you can have
another chance of finishing things in a nicer way. I strongly believe DRM
sucks but I also believe there are valid reasons for it to be there. The
problem is not black or white. I'd like to see a solution that is acceptable
for both parties (Amazon and the customer).

Thank you

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/contact-us/kindle-
help.html/r...](https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/contact-us/kindle-
help.html/ref=kindle_help_forum_cu)

~~~
yajoe
One data point: I work on the Kindle and have a pretty good understanding of
how the device works. I'm not aware of how to wipe the device remotely. It's
possible to revoke licenses for DRM content, but I have no idea how to remove
all books. I can't explain how to reproduce what the blog describes happened.

If this person did in fact purchase DRM content and Amazon revoked it, then at
a minimum the person should get a refund. There are ways that happens
automatically (because it's the right thing for the customer -- Amazon doesn't
want to take sides in the bigger debate). Since I don't see the refund
mentioned I think there is more going on than "your account is connected to a
flagged account."

Edit: SeanDav@ Deleting Amazon Account != wiping content from the device.
They're different. It sounds like the person's account was deleted, but it
shouldn't impact what's on the device save the revoked DRM licenses.

Edit 2: randartie@ I'm not blaming the victim, but refunds happen
automatically if the customer originally paid for the content. There's a whole
bunch of safeguards we have in place to protect customers and their content;
this kind of sensational FUD continues to annoy me.

~~~
eclipxe
You can tell yajoe is an Amazon employee by his use of "SeanDav@" and
"randartie@".

~~~
Strshps1MoreTim
Interesting. Do you know why is that? Does it have anything to do with the
Lisp roots of Amazon technical might?

------
andyjohnson0
Its getting to the point where I am seriously considering closing my Amazon
account. I just don't like the way it does business any more. Can anyone
recommend a good online bookseller in the UK? Is Waterstones any good?

The Guardian is running a story [1] today about how Amazon forces publishers
to cover the cost of 20% VAT (sales tax) on ebook sales, even though it only
pays 3% to the Luxembourg government (where it is based for tax purposes). It
also insists that if a publisher offers a better price to another retailer
then it must offer the same price to Amazon.

They also pay no corporation tax in the UK, despite sales of more than
£3.3bn/yr [2], through being based in Luxembourg.

I was going to jump ship to The Book Depository, but Amazon bought them last
year. Its hard to understand why this was allowed by the competition
regulator, and it doesn't give me much confidence that the UK government has
much interest in limiting their control of multiple markets.

[1] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/21/amazon-
forc...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/21/amazon-forces-
publishers-pay-vat-ebook)

[2] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/04/amazon-
brit...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/04/amazon-british-
operation-corporation-tax)

~~~
bruceboughton
Every week there is a story in the UK press about how company A is not paying
tax in the UK. This is not unique to Amazon.

Vodafone, Amazon, Starbucks, Google, Apple, ...

~~~
DanBC
There's a twist in asking customers to pay 20%, and taking that from the
authors, and then (according to GP) not paying the 20% in England but paying
just 3% in some other country.

~~~
jonno
This sounds fraudulent.

~~~
pja
You can be quite sure that the contract is not phrased in such a way that
Amazon is required to pay 20% VAT on the ebooks in question to the UK
government.

Is it sleazy as all getout? Yup, absolutely: but it's not illegal. Companies
pull this kind of bait and switch all the time when they think they can get
away with it. Remember when Microsoft bought the original Internet Explorer
codebase in return for the company in question receiving a cut of the profits
and then gave it away for free? How they must have laughed about that one back
at MS HQ...

In reality, the publishers handed Amazon a near monopoly on ebook sales by
their own short-sightedness and now Amazon is turning the thumbscrews to see
how much they're actually prepared to cough up. The games with VAT in the
contract are just part and parcel of that.

~~~
shinratdr
> How they must have laughed about that one back at MS HQ...

Until they lost the lawsuit...

[http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/news2/microsoft-and-
spyg...](http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/news2/microsoft-and-spyglass-
kiss-and-make-up)

------
jwr
I treat all E-books purchased with DRM as rentals.

When making a decision whether to buy or not, I look at the price and consider
whether I'm willing to pay this much to rent the book for an indeterminate
amount of time, possibly as little as 3 months. Quite often it turns out that
the price is too high. But I never delude myself that I actually "own" any of
the DRM-restricted content that I paid for.

~~~
nodata
> I treat all E-books purchased with DRM as rentals.

Good for you. Nobody else outside of HN does.

~~~
gioele
> > I treat all E-books purchased with DRM as rentals.

>Good for you. Nobody else outside of HN does.

Lawyers and librarians also do. There are big discussions in those circles
about the meaning of the verbs "to buy" and "to possess" as used by Amazon,
Apple and other big DRM "retailers". It is not only about DRM. Libraries are
realising that paying for access to a website of a publishing house is not
exactly like paying to receive a copy of a published journal or magazine. Have
a look at all the dark archives and to who is financing them.

First it was an hacker problem, now it has spread to humanities, in five years
the DRM will finally become a layperson problem. The first signs surfaced some
years ago, when kids started complaining about the fact that their iPod could
not be used to pass or share music while a cheaper Creative MP3 player could
without a problem.

~~~
dhimes
I had never heard of "dark archives." Is this what you mean?

(from: <http://www.osti.gov/ostiblog/dark-archives>)

So, what is a dark archive? It is, simply put, an archive of information that
is not used for public access. Most often it serves as a failsafe copy of a
light archive, i.e. a publicly available version of the information, for use
in disaster recovery operations. Dark archives need not be a fully operational
copy of an information system, rather just the content behind the information
system.

~~~
gioele
A dark archive is an archive that is not meant to be publicly accessible. As
you said it is used to store information that must survive in case of
disaster.

But what is a disaster for a library? Yesterday it was a fire, today is a
publisher going bankrupt and dismissing its online (paywalled) archive. A dark
archive pays the fee to access various online resources and store them
indefinitely, but without letting anyone access that information (well, except
the archive admins). The legality of this? Dubious. The usefulness of this?
High.

As Portico.com puts it, «We chose to create a “dark” archive to focus our
efforts on securing and preserving large volumes of content important to
libraries and their users; however, it is not exclusively dark. Participating
libraries experience the archive as a “light” or accessible archive in two
ways: auditing the archive to ensure we are prepared to support eventual use
and accessing of content that has been made available as the result of a
“trigger event” or post-cancellation access claim. Unlike many ongoing
preservation initiatives, Portico participants and their users experience
direct customer support, should they ever need it.»

But the devil is in the details. Who pays the fee for these dark archives? Do
we trust them? Who is auditing what is happening behind the doors of the dark
archives? Luckily there are FLOSS systems like LOCKSS and CLOCKSS that allow
you to create your own dark archive.

Few links:

* <http://news.jstor.org/news/2004.12/repositories.html>

* <http://hul.harvard.edu/publications/ln1356/03.html>

* <http://www.clockss.org/clockss/FAQ>

* <http://www.clockss.org/clockss/How_CLOCKSS_Works>

* [http://www.portico.org/digital-preservation/the-archive-cont...](http://www.portico.org/digital-preservation/the-archive-content-access)

------
mysterywhiteboy
The lack of transparency from Amazon here is worrying.

Because it appears to be Amazon UK dealing with the account holder I'd be
interested to know if she would get anywhere by submitting a Subject
Information Request [1].

Under the Data Protection Act 1998 an individual can submit a request for
personal information held by an organization and they must comply within 40
days.

Whether she would get the information she is interested in, i.e. which account
she is linked to, is another question.

[1]
[http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_the_public/personal_information/ho...](http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_the_public/personal_information/how_manage/access_info.aspx)

~~~
rmc
Yes I was also thinking of the Data Protection Acts here aswell.

 _Whether she would get the information she is interested in, i.e. which
account she is linked to, is another question._

Well if they don't provide it, they are breaking the law, so you can complain
about them again that way.

~~~
mysterywhiteboy
Unfortunately there are a number of circumstances where they are within their
rights to withhold information. One of these situations is where the
information relates to another individual.

If information is withheld she my be able to infer that the offending account
to which she is linked is held by someone else - though the identity of the
account holder would understandably not be given.

~~~
mercurial
This logic doesn't hold. Either Amazon is certain her account is operated by
the same character guilty of whatever violations of policy behind the "linked
account", in which case they're not disclosing any additional information, or
they're not, in which case they know they might be punishing somebody innocent
(the "Let God sort'em out" customer policy).

In any case, it sounds straight out of Kafka: you're punished, but you don't
know what crime you are supposed to have committed.

~~~
rossjudson
And that's exactly what drives me bonkers about the current wave of "too big
to care" web services, like GMail, Amazon or perhaps even Steam. Average
consumer has absolutely no way of pushing back or even getting any
information. It really feels like there needs to be some kind of law in place
that requires some form of repayment if an account is closed. The problem
there, I suppose, is potential for abuse -- buy a thousand books over a
decade, then at the end "sacrifice" the account to get it closed, and try to
get the money back.

------
lancewiggs
I wonder whether this is related to Linn living in Norway, purchasing from
Amazon.com and somehow Amazon.co.uk are getting in the middle, perhaps because
they run Europe from there.

It's the game that many people play - trying to find the best Amazon (or
Apple) store when they live and travel between countries. This means a
constant struggle to find a combination of credit card, store with enough
content (The US is best) and a local address (virtual and actual) to satisfy
arcane internal rules.

Please Amazon - please move to one global store where any credit card from any
country can purchase any edition of any book. Please Amazon and Apple, let us
combine content from multiple stores into one account, and let us have a
global price based on the best market. Yo usell more stuff, we but more as
well.

Meanwhile take the chance to collect, and pay to the local authorities,
consumption/sales tax based on the location of the IP address, not the credit
card or address of the buyer. That way if someone is standing in the UK,
buying content from the USA, then they pay UK tax (VAT), making it fairer
versus the physical and local virtual alternatives.

~~~
praptak
> Please Amazon - please move to one global store where any credit card from
> any country can purchase any edition of any book.

Not gonna happen without a huge change in international copyright law,
probably only possible if the Pirate Party gets constitution-changing majority
in all of the key countries at the same time :)

Currently, for the most books there is no such thing as the right to publish a
book globally, the existing deals are limited to geographic regions.

~~~
zizee
PhantomLobe replied to this comment:

 _Wat? I've bought in .com, .ca, .co.uk, .fr and .es with (both) France and
Spain based credit cards with no problems whatsoever._

PhantomLobe, you were hellbanned* for making a comment that didn't fit the the
community guidelines:

<http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

Looking at your comment history, you don't seem to be a spammer or a troll, I
think it is more that your second comment didn't fit the guidelines and
because you didn't have enough karma your account went under water, never to
be seen again.

I don't know if it was by a mod, or by a robot, but to keep commenting with
our PhantomLobe account is an effort in futility and a waste of your time.

I recommend that you review the guidelines doc above and avoid making comments
that may be seen as not adding to the discussion. Also, start spelling words
correctly. Wot is not a word and won't win you friends here.

On a related note: I wish HN would would stop hellbanning users for making
comments that are not constructive. That's what downvotes are for! I have been
seeing far too many people wasting so much time because they don't know they
are hellbanned. Hellbanning should be reserved to obvious trolls and spammers,
not people getting used to the standards of these discussions.

*[http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/06/suspension-ban-or-h...](http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/06/suspension-ban-or-hellban.html)

~~~
andybak
Hear, hear. I've been watching for hell-banned users for a few weeks now and
from a random sample, some of the bannings are a little harsh.

Maybe there should be a stage before hell-banning?

~~~
chris_wot
Maybe HN should reveal who the hell banners are?

~~~
pi18n
I think it's the computers. Most of the ghosts I see weren't trolls, just
young accounts going far enough against the grain to get downvotes. If it's
humans doing it, they are absurdly harsh.

~~~
Monotoko
How do you see them? I thought a hellbanned user couldn't be seen by anyone?

~~~
chris_wot
Set [showdead] to on in your preferences.

------
oliwarner
User pays money for something. Company withdraws products without notice and
deliberately harms the user's device. Yes this is awful but the solution is as
simple as it's always been:

1\. Complain. Keep complaining all the way to the top.

2\. Sue. If complaining doesn't get you want you've paid for (or your money
back, inc the Kindle you now can't use), you've just been robbed and you need
to take legal action. You might think you're under a billion and five EULAs
but when challenged, courts seem to side with the user when the EULAs attempt
to restrict rights that they're not allowed to impinge upon. There are various
sales laws that are protected well beyond the words of an EULA.

If you don't do anything about it, you make it worse for everybody else
because <<insert horrid company here>> thinks they can get away with it now.

~~~
jonno
Yep. counter thump your way to the top, then hit whatever small claims will
have you. I can't imagine any court will side with a retailer deleting
purchases without adequate excuse.

Also, actually writing letters is a great idea, I find it gets much more
attention than filling a web form or firing off a hasty email. When you lick
that stamp you're showing a company you're willing to put some effort in.

------
kabdib
I have a physical library of about 5K books. Should he want to, my son will be
able to read those books.

The DRM'd books are a different story. I still want my son to be able to read
them, but I have no assurance that the ebooks will be available to him fifteen
years from now.

So I yank the DRM from all of my Amazon purchases. These I put on backups. I
do not share them.

I would like to see legislation about the ownership of digital content,
requiring that purchased content be accessible /at all times/ -- held in
escrow, if necessary. Clearly defining a purchase is probably part of this.

~~~
lukeschlather
Is there support for this kind of legislation?

It seems like a common sense antecedent to the DMCA - if I'm legally
prohibited from circumventing DRM, companies should be legally required to
provide a means to shift that content to other media - failure to do this on
request should void the DMCA's protections against unauthorized copying.

~~~
gknoy
I'm sure that any user you asked about it would love that, but support for
legislation requires lobbying, and no group of users can match the dollars
thrown at congress by media interests who have no such desires.

------
dendory
I'm a comic book fan, and a while back I started buying comics digitally from
Dark Horse's digital store. Being also a HN reader, I'm very aware of what
these companies can do, how accounts are closed without notice, wiping all
your previous purchases, etc. So obviously as my spending went up in that one
digital store, I became concerned of what could happen, especially reading
their FAQ that clearly state all my money gave me nothing other than a right
to access their online system. So I did like any good geek and I poked around,
used a few web developer tools, and found a way to save those comics to PDF,
for backup purposes. Now, whenever I buy a new title, the first thing I do is
save it as PDF, before even reading it. So now I'm no longer worried about
what this company might do, and I encourage everyone who buys goods digitally
to do the same. Of course it sucks that we have to do this, but right now
that's the only option. Don't let yourself at the mercy of faceless
corporations.

~~~
davidw
I wonder how difficult it'd be to create an end-user app... User plugs Kindle
into the computer, user runs app, app backs up user's books, free from DRM. I
guess people could use it to pirate as well, but c'est la vie.

~~~
rada
You can download all your Kindle books and store them in a caliber library on
your computer: <http://calibre-ebook.com/>.

------
andrewpi
Apparently Amazon didn't wipe her Kindle:
<https://twitter.com/webmink/status/260432600814981120>

~~~
mike-cardwell
But her account was cancelled and her Kindle is broken, so she can't retrieve
any of her books if she gets a new Kindle. Which is practically as bad really.

------
MattBearman
I know it's not the best attitude, but if this ever happened to me I would
simply pirate all the books I'd purchased from amazon, side load them onto my
kindle and keep reading guilt free.

A part of me would like to dump amazon due to stories like this, but at the
end of the day the whole set up is just too convenient (I can find, 'buy', and
start reading a book in less than a minute directly from my kindle)

The worst part is that attitudes like mine are probably a big part of the
reason Amazon will continue to get away with this. The even worse part is that
I just don't care _enough_ to do anything about it.

I wonder how many others there are like me who should know better, but enjoy
the convenience too much?

~~~
MrMember
We all make concessions for something (unless you're rms). I refuse to buy DRM
laden ebooks, yet I've spent thousands of dollars on Steam games. I don't mind
the inconveniences of using paper books but when it comes to PC games Steam is
just to convenient for me to ignore. I know I could lose access to hundreds of
games suddenly and without warning, yet I continue to give Valve my business.

------
nowarninglabel
I've had some friends caution me over the fact that I have a "license to read"
my Amazon purchased books as opposed to "own" them, however that really never
hit home until now. I understand this is the way the business model works, but
the customer service presented here is terrible, no indication whatsoever as
to what the real problem is and no way to find out, which is sad because
usually Amazon has pretty good customer service (well in my experience, I've
been using Amazon for about a decade now, and customer service sucked until
around 2004 or so I think when it seemed to get better).

~~~
gknoy
The worst part is, that when combating people who really are trying to behave
fraudulently, giving them information about what specifically triggered the
ban can help them evade future ones -- much like how forum bans don't give a
reason why. It must be hard for Amazon (or anyone else) to separate the wheat
from the chaff of customers.

Not that this makes the events in this story any less terrible.

------
pixelcort
The worst part about this isn't so much the remote wipe of the device, but the
eternal banning of the customer without recourse.

It doesn't matter if it's 30 or 50 years from now; this person has been told
that for the rest of their life, until they die, that they are never again
able to become a customer.

Sounds like a long time to be banned without being told why.

------
jiggy2011
So even if we assume that Amazon was correct and that this account was closed
because it was linked to another account that was closed because of 'abuse'.

I don't understand how that would justify or require revoking access to stuff
that was already bought/licensed? You could simply deny the offending user
access to buying new stuff instead.

~~~
powertower
The "abuse" was probably related to stripping DRM off the titles, and
uploading them for anyone to download free-of-charge. Then that would make
sense.

------
donapieppo
A sentence like "We wish you luck in locating a retailer better able to meet
your needs and will not be able to offer any additional insight or action on
these matters" is the best explanation of the evil of monopoly.

~~~
chris_wot
Monopolies tend to die. Sure, there might not be any competition from other
companies, but their biggest competition is in the mass distributed and
downloaded pirated book market.

As an example, I only buy non-DRM PDFs, but I _never_ distribute them. Ever.
And I never will, because those who use non-DRM PDFs get my hard earned money
as I will then get to enjoy and profit from their works on any device that I
so desire to use.

Now if, for example, I got a DRM encoded book and it was taken away from me
due to some ridiculous arbitrary decision, I would be sorely tempted to get a
non-DRM encoded copy of the book that I _purchased_. I think, in fact I _know_
, I would be justified.

But given that I don't buy DRM encoded books, this will never be an ethical
dilemna for me. And I'm no dirty hippy :-)

------
chillax
Seems the blog is getting hit hard now. Here is the Google Cache:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Awww.b...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Awww.bekkelund.net%2F2012%2F10%2F22%2Foutlawed-
by-amazon-drm%2F&oq=cache%3Awww.bekkelund.net%2F2012%2F10%2F22%2Foutlawed-by-
amazon-drm%2F&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

------
jiggy2011
Surely this is what a small claims court could be used for?

I haven't read the Amazon TOS but is it really as simple as "you rent this
book for as long as we feel like and we can revoke it for no reason"?

In which case I would be somewhat surprised if this really held up in a court,
for example what happens if you buy a book and they immediately decide to
revoke the license 1 second after purchase?

~~~
pja
_Surely this is what a small claims court could be used for?_

In principle, possibly. It's a bit difficult to sue if you live in Norway &
have been buying from Amazon US though: your costs will exceed any potential
return very quickly!

(I'm assuming that filing a small claims suit remotely is either not possible
or not effective here of course.)

~~~
SEMW
Nah, you just sue in Norway. Might be expensive for Amazon to defend, but
that's their problem.

More specifically: Norway is part of the Brussels regime for determining
jurisdiction to sue ( <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_Regime> ). So
this applies:

 _A consumer may bring proceedings against the other party to a contract
either in the courts of the Contracting State in which that party is domiciled
or in the courts of the Contracting State in which he is himself domiciled._

And no, companies can't escape it by putting a jurisdiction clause in a
consumer contract. Consumer protection law trump contract terms. If Amazon
want to do business in a country, they have to abide by the consumer laws of
that country.

(I am not a lawyer).

------
run4yourlives
I'm not saying this to be rude, so I apologize in advance if you personally
take offence:

In my mind, you're a complete idiot if you are an e-book consumer at this
point in time.

You essentially rent the book for a price often higher than owning a physical
copy of the exact same material. All this for the slight mobility advantage,
and instant purchase ability. You can't share your ebooks with friends. You
run the risk that the publisher might decide you're no longer worthy of that
purchase.

I question the sanity of any person that has done a pro/con comparison and
actually judged e-books to be superior. My guess is that most people don't
bother to actually think about these purchases.

e-books can and should be revolutionary, but what is on offer now is
essentially nothing more than window dressing - and people are eating it up.

~~~
samdk
You're understating the benefits and missing a few key ones.

First, the instant purchase ability is extremely important. It means that
books gain some measure of equality with other forms of media (the internet,
movies/tv, music). With a Kindle I can read whatever book I want whenever I
want, which means that I read many more books than I used to.

Second, the mobility advantage isn't slight at all, especially for people who
read a lot. If you're never carrying more than a single book around that's one
thing, but I read 1-2 books a week, and a lot more (often 5+ a week) if I'm
traveling. Even just during my daily commute, it's far easier to read while
standing on the subway with a Kindle instead of a book.

Beyond that, I find reading on a Kindle to be far more comfortable than
reading a book. The actual reading experience is much nicer than trade
paperbacks, which are printed very cheaply. It's much lighter and only
requires one hand to hold/turn pages, so I can more easily read while lying
down, and the newest version has a very nice backlight, so that I can read in
bad lighting.

There are obvious disadvantages, and I absolutely hate that DRM is still a
thing, but the benefits absolutely outweigh any possible disadvantages for me.
Anecdotally, it's the difference between me reading 5-10 books a year and me
reading 50-100 books a year, and I'm a much happier person in the latter
state.

\--

Also, if you're not saying something to be rude, you should actually write
like that, not add a disclaimer at the top of what you're writing. There were
a lot of ways to get the same message across without calling people idiots.

~~~
run4yourlives
I'm understating the benefits because I highly doubt the average person is
reading anywhere close to what you are reading. Personally, I'm not exactly
sure where you are finding the time to read this much, but I digress.

A vast majority of people read one book at a time. Two max. Given this, the
idea that there is a massive benefit in portability is completely overstated -
few people (outside of students) were carrying ten pounds of books around with
them to support their reading habits.

This same line of thinking holds true with purchasing. There is most certainly
a convenience in not having to visit a store (or even order online), but most
people read at a pace that is fully supportive of being able to find their
next read in the traditional manner.

That being said, I recognize these are both advantages. What I'm saying though
is that there are very few people where this "advantage" makes any form of
economic sense. Assuming your usage, this advantage is costing you $200-$500 a
year. _And your purchase isn't one of ownership_.

The argument for e-books right now is like leasing a car for $50 more a month
than you can buy it for. Sure there are advantages to leasing, but logically,
they don't come close to outweighing the costs.

~~~
samdk
Even for people who don't read as much as I do, I think those benefits exist
and that you're understating them. (Especially because my Kindle is _part of
the reason_ I read so much, not just the means by which I do it.) A Kindle is
still a lot more portable than even a paperback. (I can comfortably fit it in
a jacket pocket.) It's still way more convenient to be able to buy books
whenever you want than to have to plan a trip to the bookstore or library.
It's still a lot nicer of a reading experience than most paperbacks.

Yes, I do spend a lot of money on books every year. When you look at it in
context though, that number really isn't crazy, even for something I don't end
up owning. Cable TV, a Netflix account, Spotify, and going to the movies once
a month are all in the same order of magnitude for similar-ish kinds of
things, and you don't end up owning anything as a result of any of those,
either. Reading--even when you're buying every book you read--is actually a
surprisingly cost-effective means of entertainment.

And there's definitely not a 100% premium compared to me buying the physical
books--that's a very silly way to do cost analysis. A sizable percentage of
the actual benefit of reading a book is reading it for the first time, so
losing access to it later doesn't completely devalue your purchase. Even if
you were to factor in the chance of losing access to the books you've spent
money on later (which is entirely reasonable), you should also be factoring in
the chance that you _don't_ ever lose access to your books. Anecdotally,
events like this seem extremely uncommon, and so treating them like a
certainty doesn't make much sense.

As I said, I'm not trying to defend Kindle (or any other) DRM here. I'm trying
to argue against the idea that people who own and use ebook readers are
idiots.

(And as for how I read so much...20 minutes both ways on the subway plus
another 3-4 hours throughout the week is easily a book a week for me--I read
pretty quickly--and I occasionally just sit down and decide to spend an
evening reading instead of doing something else.)

------
einarfd
It seems that the Norwegian consumer protection agency have heard about this
case and have started looking into it (link in Norwegian
[http://www.itavisen.no/904648/forbrukerraadet-helt-
haarreise...](http://www.itavisen.no/904648/forbrukerraadet-helt-haarreisende)
).

It's going to be interesting to see if they are able to get any traction on
this. They actually might since her contact in Amazon seemed to be working for
Amazon.co.uk, and Norway is part of the EU's inner market.

------
SEMW
> _How will she ever find the means to get her books back? By suing a large
> corporation half-way round the earth?_

IANAL. But for anyone in a similar situation, consumer protection law is
usually better than you think. Don't assume you can't sue, or have to sue in
another country, just because the contract says you do. Consumer protection
laws can trump contracts!

In particular, for anyone in EU or EFTA at least (i.e. part of the Brussels
regime for determining jurisdiction to sue,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_Regime> ), who is acting as a consumer,
you can sue in your own country: " _A consumer may bring proceedings against
the other party to a contract either in the courts... in which that party is
domiciled or in the courts... in which he is himself domiciled._ "

If Amazon want to do business in a country, they have to abide by the consumer
laws of that country.

I am not a lawyer. Get yourself a lawyer and know your rights!

------
jnazario
an increased number of stories like this will make the book pirating
underground a lot more attractive to a wider audience. it exists, it's not
quite napster-like yet but it's getting there. no DRM, a potentially wider
catalog, etc.

this is a risk for publishers and loss-leaders (like amazon) alike.

~~~
jakubp
There's something to what you sad. Isn't it ironic to see a situation that so
closely mirrors piracy?

\- with DRMed books, Amazon says "yes, you >>have<< these ebooks, you paid for
them [wink]", but Amazon actually _can_ take them away from you and you can do
nothing about it. You paid [for ebook copies] and are left with nothing

\- in piracy, a person who gets pirated copies of a book says "yes, if I want
to read your books, dear authors/publishers, I'll pay for them [wink]", but
that person can actually get any number of books from you for free. You paid
[for publishing/marketing] and are left with nothing

~~~
chris_wot
The irony is, all that you have to do is get your entire book list, then hunt
down the books you already paid for and then you can get them DRM free.

Then you never pay Amazon another cent. After all, they didn't want your
money! If they have refused to let you buy content that you require, then I
can see why some people feel a moral justification to pirate the books.

It's really quite simple. If this happened in the U.S. then they could take
court action against Amazon. If you are from overseas, you really have no
recourse. Therefore, merely because of where you live, you are restricted from
material that may enrich your life. That's discrimination, and I can well
understand that someone might feel justified in breaking the law to download
pirated books.

Amazon... hurting themselves as only a greedy corporation can.

------
AngryParsley
First, it's important to note that we don't have very much information yet.
Given what I've read so far, I assume stupidity on the part of Amazon.

Before everyone starts hating on Amazon specifically, remember that this same
thing would happen with Apple, Xbox Live, or Barnes & Noble accounts. It's not
that all these companies want to have DRM. It's the content owners who dictate
the terms of licensing.

~~~
rmc
_I assume stupidity on the part of Amazon._

Oh I'm almost certain that this is stupidity, and not malice. (Why would
amazon shut down an account of some regular person?)

However, the big problem is that "all the books you own" should be dependent
on a massive company never acting stupid. The problem isn't stupidity/malice,
the problem is that stupidity can have such a massive massive effect.

~~~
brazzy
Well, the same thing could happen with physical books and a moving company
acting stupid - may even be more likely. The difference is that you can sue
them for damages in that case

------
snitko
I can absolutely agree that the story is very disturbing, however I also
believe that it is an Amazon's right as a private company to do whatever the
hell it wants with products an services it provides. The problem is not that
it can or cannot legally wipe out the contents of its devices, the problem is
that there's not enough competition yet. If Amazon was in a very harsh
competition with any another company for ebook market (which I believe it
currently isn't) a story like this would undoubtedly drive a substantial
amount of customers to competitors. What Amazon currently does, it enjoys a
temporary situation in which it is a market leader. Since ebooks is not
exactly a very regulated industry, I don't think it's too long before we
actually have a serious competition.

~~~
cloverich
> Since ebooks is not exactly a very regulated industry...

Definitely is a highly regulated (gov't, media co.'s) industry. Without
knowing anything else about it - how hard is it to create a web application to
serve e-book content? Not very. Yet how many good ones exist? One? Two? That
alone should tell you there's a ton of baggage that goes with the market.

------
bencevans
If they do that with books, this could happen with AWS?!

Dear Sir/Madam,

We've deleted your EC2, S3... Services and Permanently suspended your AWS
account due to it's been linked to another account somewhere on the internet.
In other words your companies services/product/startup is offline without
notice and we don't care.

~~~
dpark
Almost certainly. I would be quite shocked if Amazon didn't have the "we can
turn you off at any time" clause written into their AWS ToS.

------
rdl
I have hundreds of Kindle books, preferentially buy Kindle books, and also
have 150+ Audible audiobooks (also owned by Amazon).

I've always been afraid of what might happen to vendor-controlled content
(either cloud servers or DRM), so I maintain a local de-DRM'd version of every
file. For Audible, I actually had to go through a download, aac playback in
iTunes to mp3 compression, mp3 file split workflow to make Audible books work
with the RNS-E audio in my audi (it has built-in SD slots to play MP3, but the
iPod in interface won't work with Audible due to DRM restrictions in their
app).

It's a shame that you have to go through all this trouble just to use things
you've legally purchased. It's sort of ok when the system just works (like
Steam does now, although it didn't always), but horrible when you don't trust
the vendor much and where the software doesn't work very well (EA Origin...).

I don't think I'd buy anything where there wasn't at least a technical
workaround to rip to servers and formats under my control.

~~~
WA
I bought an audiobook via Amazon which was DRM-free. The next audiobook was
only available through Audible. So I signed up to give it a try and I have to
say that this was the worst buying experience ever.

It starts with the password policy. Passwords require a maximum length(!),
which is not only stupid but also a strong indicator that they store the
passwords in plaintext (like varchar(16)). I asked them whether they'd do that
and they denied, but I don't believe them.

And, well, the whole DRM-nonsense and stupid file formats that don't play on
my Android phone without their app. I won't buy via Audible again.

------
shismijuh
I own 2 kindles. Got one more for Mum also. I need to get my books out ASAP.
Somehow, feel very cheated. Nobody can walk into your house and take away your
paperbook. This is theft! And then the arrogance of no explanations.

~~~
hobbes
You did read the Terms and Conditions before you "bought" the books, didn't
you?

If you bought the books, you agreed [in the eyes of the law] to this kind of
eventuality..

I'm as guilty of this kind of thing as well. We tend to assume an imaginary
T&C that conforms to _we_ think is fair when we buy things online - and we
have to learn the hard way that the real T&C's are very much more dubious.

Here's the relevant bit in the T&C's:

"Upon your download of Digital Content and payment of any applicable fees
(including applicable taxes), the Content Provider grants you a non-exclusive
right to view, use, and display such Digital Content an unlimited number of
times"

"Your rights under this Agreement will automatically terminate if you fail to
comply with any term of this Agreement."

The key points is that this is a "license agreement" that grants you rights on
the payment of applicable fees.

TL;DR: You don't own any content you licensed to read on your kindle.

~~~
josephlord
If you read and actually considered the worst case in every contract/website
terms and conditions/software licence that you come across it would probably
take about a day a week and you would never actually agree to anything that
wasn't a GPL/BSD/MIT... software licence. For one thing most give the party
offering the agreement rights to change it which should be an absolute no-way.

For most things such as online purchases I tend to rely on law and
reasonableness of people and take the chance without reading expecting the
maximum downside to be tens of pounds related to that purchase. I am a little
more careful when locked into eco-systems (Kindle/app-stores) but still go a
fair bit on taking the risk with the reputation of the provider and the size
of the risk and the cost of getting the content another way.

~~~
hobbes
The kindle license agreement is relatively short and perfectly understandable.

The moral of this story is: if you give a website some money, find out what
you are getting for your money.

------
mikecane
There is new information here:

Rights? You have no right to your eBooks.
[http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-
says/2012/10/rights-y...](http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-
says/2012/10/rights-you-have-no-right-to-your-ebooks/index.htm)

Edited to add: So this seems to be a case of a used Kindle's UDID being tied
to a previously-suspended account and she got caught in the dragnet by buying
that device used without knowing of its history. At some point -- if someone
can get through to a live human being at Amazon -- this should all be
straightened out. This is yet another reason why everyone should be careful
buying used electronics with UDIDs (see eBay and Craigslist for all the "clean
ESN" mentions for used phones!).

------
robk
She should clearly pursue this in small claims court in the UK. She should be
able to do this with a foreign address even. Easy and effective.
<https://www.gov.uk/make-money-claim-online>

------
capisce
That's very frightening, makes me reconsider buying more e-books from
Amazon...

~~~
ghshephard
It's important to note that you don't actually buy e-books from Amazon, you
license the right to read, and when that license is revoked/cancelled, those
books are no longer available to you.

~~~
Nursie
I wonder if some large organisation (EU?) could force a change in this idea?
It does seem like an end-run around so much in the way of consumer rights.

~~~
abrahamsen
EU seems likely, the European Court of Justice recently ruled that customers
have the right to resale on licensed Steam games. The reasoning was basically
that a perpetual license equals ownership, and that normal ownership right
cannot be limited by the license after the transaction.

[http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-03-eu-rules-
publis...](http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-03-eu-rules-publishers-
cannot-stop-you-reselling-your-downloaded-games)

------
scotty79
I have a Kindle but I don't want to have to do with Amazon. What is the best
open firmware so far I can flash into it?

I'd like to retain ability to send documents from my computer to my Kindle
over the internet.

~~~
rmc
I have a Kindle and never read nor use any DRM books. You don't need to use
Amazon's software or service or anything. You can convert files into .mobi
format using open source tools and use a programme like Calibre or just put
the files in the "documents" folder of the Kindle to load them.

Using a Kindle without DRM is very possible.

If you turn off wireless, then it will never try to do any software updating.

~~~
gioele
What is the point of buying a Kindle then? You could have bought one of the
many ebook readers available out there. What about a Kobo? Or a stylish Sony
PRS? A small Booken? A feature-packed Onyx? An hackable iRiver Story?

Why giving money to Amazon in the first place if you do not agree with their
core business practice?

~~~
rmc
Christmas Present. ☺

Also, not all books on Amazon's Kindle store have DRM. I can buy them.

------
DiabloD3
This is why you should use a DRM removal tool and use a third party e-book
reader on an Android tablet.

~~~
AlisdairO
I remove DRM from every ebook I buy. I don't redistribute, but I refuse to be
put in a situation like the one linked.

------
rmc
Should have pirated. You get a better product.

------
Arjuna
I am curious: could a story like this happen in the United States?

According to my reading of the legal case (I am not a lawyer, but it would be
interesting if any of you are could comment - grellas, perhaps) regarding
Amazon's remote deletion of _Nineteen Eighty-Four_ and _Animal Farm_ , the
settlement involving that case appears to protect what happened in this story
from happening to users in the United States.

Of course, it goes without saying that I do not agree with how things went
down in this story, where a person has absolutely no recourse with Amazon,
with the proverbial door completely shut in their face. However, I find it
interesting that, again, according to my interpretation of the aforementioned
settlement, it appears that Kindle units that are purchased and used in the
United States are afforded special protections by law from what specifically
happened in the story (i.e., the settlement outlines very specific cases where
remote deletion can occur, but they do not appear to apply with regard to what
happened in the story).

Is my reading of this correct? If so, why aren't all Kindle owners afforded
this protection?

Here is the citation from the settlement [1]:

"For copies of Works purchased pursuant to TOS granting "the non-exclusive
right to keep a permanent copy" of each purchased Work and to "view, use and
display [such Works] an unlimited number of times, solely on the [Devices] . .
. and solely for [the purchasers'] personal, non-commercial use," Amazon will
not remotely delete or modify such Works from Devices purchased and being used
in the United States unless

(a) the user consents to such deletion or modification;

(b) the user requests a refund for the Work or otherwise fails to pay for the
Work (e.g., if a credit or debit card issuer declines to remit payment);

(c) a judicial or regulatory order requires such deletion or modification; or

(d) deletion or modification is reasonably necessary to protect the consumer
or the operation of a Device or network through which the Device communicates
(e.g., to remove harmful code embedded within a copy of a Work downloaded to a
Device).

This paragraph does not apply to

(a) applications (whether developed or offered by Amazon or by third parties),
software or other code;

(b) transient content such as blogs; or

(c) content that the publisher intends to be updated and replaced with newer
content as newer content becomes available. With respect to newspaper and
magazine subscriptions, nothing in this paragraph prohibits the current
operational practice pursuant to which older issues are automatically deleted
from the Device to make room for newer issues, absent affirmative action by
the Device user to save older issues."

[1]
[http://assets.bizjournals.com/cms_media/pdf/KindleCase1.pdf?...](http://assets.bizjournals.com/cms_media/pdf/KindleCase1.pdf?site=techflash.com)

~~~
elarkin
A co-worker of mine (US) lost his kindle library about a year ago. Amazon
closed his account and refused to tell him why. It took several tech blogs and
newspapers phoning up Amazon with the story for him to get it back.

In other words, he got restitution because of articles like this one. He no
longer buys kindle books.

~~~
saucerful
Did he ever find out why the library was deleted in the first place?

~~~
elarkin
Never

------
akavlie
Something very similar happened to my seller account late last year. The
emails were very similar -- including the cause for the closure (alleged
linkage to a previously closed account). Story here:

[http://aaron.kavlie.net/2011/12/web/amazon-com-just-
closed-m...](http://aaron.kavlie.net/2011/12/web/amazon-com-just-closed-my-
seller-account-no-warning-no-details/)

My story got to the top spot on Hacker News and, thanks to the exposure there,
Amazon reversed its decision. At no point did I get anything that looked like
a personalized response -- just terse form emails that didn't divulge any
details.

What surprises me the most about this story is that they use the same approach
with the consumer end of the business. I figured that the ham-handed treatment
I got was due to Amazon's lack of care for that particular piece of their
business, and that any issue with _buyers_ would be taken up with more
personal attention, and provide ample opportunity for appeal. Guess I was
wrong.

------
sami36
Am I the only one thinking there is more to this story than what has been
leaked so far ? I don't usually step up to the defense of corporate America
but in my dealings with Amazon, I haven't encountered anything but stellar
customer service. I hope Amazon releases more about the specifics that led
them to take such a draconian action. This is either a terrible mistake
that'll come with profuse apology & additional scrutiny at their (maybe
trigger happy) fraud processes....or a last ditch action to deal with a
serious violation. Either way, this will need to be explained, for now
conclusions are being drawn on the basis of nothing but speculation.

------
conradfr
Is a Kindle usable without an Amazon account ?

~~~
savramescu
Very much so. Just use Calibre to load books and your fine.

~~~
glogla
I'm not sure how it works now, but older Kindles were just mass storage
devices so you could put books there by hand.

~~~
josteink
You still can, but calibre lets you do format-conversion (since mobi is the
only real format you can push to it while retaining readbility).

It also allows you to tidy up meta-data and stuff to make things look better.

It's definitely a "required" component as far as my Kindle is concerned.

------
bborud
What did we expect?

When everything works we all ooh and aah over how great Kindle and a thousand
other things like it are. When someone tries to bring a more expensive product
to market we scoff and criticize and shake our heads.

Well kids, "cheap" has its price, and the price is shitty, impersonal,
bullshit customer service. Amazon has been great at customer service for many
years in their physical goods-business, but to push cost down for electronic
services, this is what you have to expect.

In the future things will be cheap and human interaction will be at a premium.

------
asgeirn
The worst part is the blatant arrogance of Mr. Michael Murphy, who does not at
all consider the possibility of it all being a misunderstanding or some error
on Amazon's behalf, and giving the customer no option to rectify the issue.

These are two options for who Michael Murphy is:

<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/michael-murphy/17/b72/231>

<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/michael-murphy/0/b84/9b5>

~~~
mercurial
I don't think posting his personal details on the Internet is a very good
idea.

~~~
Drakim
Michael Murphy posted his personal details on the Internet. asgeirn posted
links.

~~~
mercurial
Fair point. However, it doesn't bring anything to the discussion, other than
giving the temptation to 4chan fans to start a harassment campaign, so what
the hell is it doing here?

~~~
sudhirj
I think 4chan is perfectly capable of going to Google, typing in "michael
murphy linkedin amazon" and harassing the first two results on the page
without HN tempting them.

------
arandomJohn
First a disclaimer: I think this is outrageous and hope that her account is
restored.

Now my questions:

Does her account use her home address? That seems unlikely as she is in Norway
but is dealing with Amazon US. What are the rules for purchasing content when
you're not resident? Could this be the problem? If so that sucks.

Secondly, it appears that she began her Kindle odyssey with a used Kindle.
Could that be what links her account to a fraudulent one? A unique ID from one
of her devices has been used by someone else in the past?

------
adrianscott
Am I the only one who will take Amazon's action and level of customer service
into consideration when deciding on a cloud hosting provider, Amazon Web
Services vs. others?

Accounts are accounts on Amazon and will they link a consumer account you or
your developers use with an account you use for hosting business web sites on
EC2?

Or, reading the blog entry, will they mistakenly link another account with
your other Amazon accounts, including the one you use for EC2?...

------
mark_l_watson
I have sympathy for the lady (and others) who lost their Kindle books.

However, I am going to take the opposition view here because I feel like
people don't understand 'the beast' also known as Amazon.

Amazon optimizes on low margins, and cheap prices for goods (both physical and
electronic). Amazon optimizes on the benefit to the mass majority of their
customers at the expense of a small minority who do occasionally get "thrown
under the bus."

I buy lots of Kindle books, but there are a few things I do to mitigate risk.
First, for technical books I try to buy from publishers who have daily 30% to
50% off sales where I get PDF, a MOBI (Kindle format), and a iPub files.
Secondly, I buy a physical book if I think that a book will have long term
value (for example, I would read it several times during a financial meltdown
when electricity is scarce, and we spend most of our time grubbing around for
food - this has happened in Argentina, Russia, Iraq, etc., and it may well
happen sometime in the USA). Thirdly, I buy "good deals" on the Kindle; for
example, I am reading James Joyce's "Ulysses" right now and I only paid about
$2 for it - a great bargain.

~~~
nasmorn
You do know Ulysses is out of Copyright? You paid 2$ for the convenience of
not using project gutenbergs version.

------
qw
Looks like the database is down. Here's the cached version:

[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&outpu...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-
ab&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.bekkelund.net%2F2012%2F10%2F22%2Foutlawed-by-
amazon-
drm%2F&oq=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.bekkelund.net%2F2012%2F10%2F22%2Foutlawed-
by-amazon-drm%2F)

------
chris_wot
Interesting link to an Amazon.com Kindle Help discussion by the blog author:

[http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/forums/kindleqna/ref=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/forums/kindleqna/ref=kindle_help_forum_tft_tp?ie=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1GLDPZMNR1X53&cdThread=Tx2VVCMMPS41HGW)

~~~
alan_cx
Blimey, Amazon also has "fanboys". I suppose its logical.

~~~
chris_wot
Fanboys and logical are not two words that you often see together in an
argument.

------
miles
_Update: Simon Phipp sez, "Kindlegate update: Linn says her account was
mysteriously re-activated after my article published."_

via [http://boingboing.net/2012/10/22/kindle-user-claims-
amazon-d...](http://boingboing.net/2012/10/22/kindle-user-claims-amazon-
dele.html)

------
brokentone
Whether the story is completely true, whether it has another side, or if it's
a complete farce, we understand this situation could happen under the
agreements we make to Amazon and just about every other digital services
provider (yes, we've jumped from goods to services). When we understand that,
don't take action, and continue purchasing from any of the companies that
legalese themselves onto a fortified high ground that disadvantages consumers
to this degree, we're part of the problem.

The very fact this story is this popular is because we all understand it could
happen to us, think that by upvoting it, commenting on it, and sharing it,
we're making a difference, but then we go right back to Amazon and purchase
more things. Perpetuating the cycle.

------
guiambros
Update: seems her access was just reinstated. No further comments from Amazon,
but their PR team did clarify that account status has nothing to do with
access to your book's library" -- this is positive news, but still need
further clarification. How can I download my books without my account?

 _"We would like to clarify our policy on this topic. Account status should
not affect any customer's ability to access their library. If any customer has
trouble accessing their content, he or she should contact customer service for
help. Thank you for your interest in Kindle."_

[http://boingboing.net/2012/10/22/kindle-user-claims-
amazon-d...](http://boingboing.net/2012/10/22/kindle-user-claims-amazon-
dele.html)

------
frownie
Damn you all, you're so naive...

1/ Amazon is a private company. 2/ You don't buy books from them, you buy a
license to read them.

So by buying a book, you agree with their power. If you don't like to be in
such control, then please, apply one of the start up credo : find a better
competitor.

But don't complain, please.

(and the same goes with Apple who surely has some super control on your phone,
and don't complain about FaceBook when they'll kill your account when you
don't behave.)

Welcome to the privacy nightmare you all voted for by buying their shiny
stuff.

Another option is : court ! Hey but you don't have enough money ? Hey, but
that's what happens when you deal alone with a megacorp : you're just a small
insect.

Funny people often forget that...

stF

------
antihero
A random idea but perhaps she logged in with her account onto a public
computer that had been used by someone for fraud? I don't know, she should use
EU law against Amazon - it should apply as they're operating in the EU.

------
gliese1337
This is why I will not buy proprietary readers like Kindle, nor access to any
digital media for which I do not get my very own copy of a file I can back up
on my very own hard-drives. The story doesn't particularly make me hate
Amazon- it's just one anecdote, and I've had great experiences with Amazon
customer service myself- but it shows what _can_ be done. No matter how much I
might like Amazon's other services, I will never trust any company not to do
anything that they are technically capable of doing. To keep them from
screwing you over, don't give them the power to do so.

------
engtech
Here's a fun game to illustrate why we should be interested in protecting
consumer rights to maintain their own libraries of digital goods.

Go back through the New York Time Best Seller list in 5 year increments, and
see at what point you start reaching books you've never heard of and that are
no longer in print.

It's pretty revealing that except for novels that are in school curriculum or
transferred to another medium (book, TV) the majority of best sellers are only
relevant for 15-20 years.

If you're in your late 30s or old, try to find a new copy of some favourite
novels from your adolescence. Good luck.

------
jordanthoms
If she has made any recent purchases, doing a chargeback would be an option.

------
clumsysmurf
I was recently interested in purchasing eBooks from Morgan Kaufmann. "The UX
Book: Process and Guidelines for Ensuring a Quality User Experience" costs
$89.95 USD; surely for that insane price your eBook would be DRM-free, right?
Wrong. Both ePub and PDF use Adobe Adept (Inept) DRM.

You can try to find the Kindle/iBook version, but as this article points out
"its a license to read" ... and very often, the quality of the digital
conversion is very poor, especially for literature with illustrations.

DRM-free PDF is the only way for me.

~~~
Antiks72
Ink and paper is the only way for me.

------
sbochins
I don't think I'll ever buy into a closed system like Amazon ebooks. Seems
like you can have so much eggs in one basket and they can just smash your eggs
w/o giving any reason. I don't read a lot of books for my free time. I have a
safari books account at work that I use a lot. It is nice since it is kind of
like Netflix. It's just a subscription, so they can't pull anything crazy like
Amazon is doing here. I also like the feel of actual books, and they are nice
decorations in your house.

------
NaturalDoc
Its real simple folks. Refuse to do business with Amazon or any affiliates
(sites hosted with AWS, amazon affiliates). It was once said if you are not a
part of the solution, you are part of the problem. The solution is to make
Amazon feel your displeasure in their bottom line.

It is pathetic what we have allowed corporations to do to us when we are the
one's providing them the power to do it. Maybe we, as a society, have just
become too lazy and complacent to worry about being trampled on?

------
damon
It would be interesting to hear Amazon's side of the story. It just doesn't
seem like something _any_ digital retailer would do.

Assuming Lynn did no wrong and this is entirely a fraud algorithm problem on
Amazon's side, you would think there is a higher authority within Amazon to
dispute the problem. It's a shame they they didn't offer her anything in terms
of dispute resolution or fraud prevention.

I'm going to email Amazon's feedback link as chanux did, I hope the larger HN
community does the same.

------
chanux
This sounds disturbing to me since I too live far away from Amazon's
jurisdiction and I clearly know I would be even more helpless in a case like
this.

Amazon's service was so sweet I didn't mind the DRM, the metaphorical
diabetes. It seems now is the time to open my eyes and (again) realize 'RMS is
always right'. I think I will stop buying any amazon e-book at least until I
hear something good regarding this issue.

------
pleskon
> The fact that Amazon can do this is

It is detailed in the contract few people bother to read prior to signing!

.

> The problem? Microsoft has your operating system,

> Google has your email, eBay has your stuff, PayPal

> has your money, Amazon has your books, Facebook has

> your social life, etc.

.

The problem is YOU GAVE each of those entities information out of hand with
misplaced trust.

.

> We need to push for a universal option for arbitration

Push for less inane contractual terms first. Then change the cultural ethos of
wrong-tolerance.

------
tobyjsullivan
Regarding the policy violation, is it possible the problem was the fact she
lived in Norway and was using amazon.com?

My experience, as a Canadian, is that Amazon encourages use of amazon.ca (your
local version of their site) and you have to go through some tricks to use
Amazon.com.

Many of my friends did because that was the only way to get a kindle and books
for years. Are they all at risk of this?

------
e12e
FWIW, I'm from Norway, and this story _seems_ legit - although it hasn't (yet)
blown up in dead tree media over here. I think it just might.

On a related note (unfortunately not an alternative to everything Amazon
offers):

[http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/07/torforge-e-books-are-now-
dr...](http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/07/torforge-e-books-are-now-drm-free)

~~~
e12e
[http://translate.google.no/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&j...](http://translate.google.no/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itavisen.no%2F904648%2Fforbrukerraadet-
helt-haarreisende&act=url)

A comment from the Norwegian Government's "Consumer Council" - charged with
protecting (private) consumer rights.

------
tsotha
I would think this is actionable in the US. Her being in Norway complicates
things.

I've spent more than $1k on ebooks for my kindle. If Amazon did this to me
they'd definitely have a lawsuit on their hands. Not because I would win in
court, but because I could use it as a springboard to do millions of dollars
in damage to their reputation.

------
njharman
> get her books back?

They aren't her books, they aren't even books in the physical sense. They are
the copyright owner's "books". All she had (and paid for) were licenses to
display (in limited fashion) "books".

Linn might not like this, she should fight (infinite, broad) copyright which
is the root of all this evil, not Amazon.

------
Karunamon
I understand the fear expressed here by a number of people that this might
happen to them, but honestly? I think the answer here is pretty mundane and
deserves a bit of perspective.

Some low level intern screwed up somewhere. While that hardly excuses Amazon
for their exceptionally horrendous CS in this case (usually they're know for
being good on that front), ask yourself:

    
    
      * How many customers does Amazon have?
      * How many instances of this have ever happened?
      * How likely is it to happen again?
    

The answers there are "a hell of a lot" (>100M), not many, and not very.

One cockup with one customer hasn't shaken my faith in Amazon's ecosystem.
They're going to have to try a lot harder in order to achieve that goal.

Look at another platform like Steam. I'd say they have even more issues
because they'll actually dismiss people from the service for things like card
chargebacks or restrict multiplayer account-wide in case of cheating. They've
had errors too. They're rare and statistically insignificant, just like in
this case.

And for the love of god if you're going to downvote me, please at least bother
to explain why so we can all learn something.

------
SeanDav
Which is why I never purchase DRM goods if I can possibly avoid it. Support
vendors that don't have DRM.

------
FiloSottile
I hate when retailers make piracy tools necessary even if you paid. Head to
the Apprentice Alf's Blog.

------
gbeeson
This entire situation is the foundation of my reluctance to completely shift
to 'online media'. I have always understood that I would be leasing the media
and that it could be terminated for cause just as the article related. Rough
stuff.

------
realrocker
I am really infuriated by this. It's high time one of us build's Kindle's
competition. DRM "must" not be handled by the store. If DRM has to exist, it
should be the prerogative of the author not the store owner. What the hell
man!!

------
antihero
This is theft. Yet if someone were to get caught shoplifting, they'd face
jailtime.

------
DenisM
Apparently, Amazon did not delete the books from her Kindle. See the twit:

[http://boingboing.net/2012/10/22/kindle-user-claims-
amazon-d...](http://boingboing.net/2012/10/22/kindle-user-claims-amazon-
dele.html)

------
isharabash
We're only hearing one side, has anyone else questioned how true this story
is?

~~~
lwat
We're only hearing one side because Amazon refuses to say anything.

------
rawoke
This sucks big time !! I'd be so pissed if this was me !

I've mailed amazon to hear if this is the norm.

I don't really expect a response, but hopefully a few 1000's emails like that
will at least let them give the situation more attention ?

------
Nursie
It's almost as if they want to drive people to alernate ways of acquiring
content...

I still read a mix of kindle stuff and paper books, but the kindle is
invaluable for travelling light. This is disappointing to hear about.

------
Tooluka
Never ever buy e-books from Amazon, only physical books and things. Especially
because all e-stuff on your Amazon account can be permanently deleted without
any option to restore (except to buy it again).

------
epaga
Just had the following support chat with an Amazon rep:

Me:I have really enjoyed Kindle on multiple devices so far but I just read the
following account of a different Kinde customer and am _appalled_ at Amazon's
treatment of this individual: <http://www.bekkelund.net/2012/10/22/outlawed-
by-amazon-drm/> Is it really true that at any moment, Amazon could delete all
my books and not tell me the reason? If so, I strongly request that Amazon
revisit its DRM rules & regulations. Thanks! Hi Elakkiya!

Elakkiya:Hello, I'm Elakkiya from Amazon Kindle support.I'll be happy to help
you today

Me:awesome Basically it comes down to these terms cited by Amazon Exec Michael
Murphy in his letter: "Per our Conditions of Use which state in part:
Amazon.co.uk and its affiliates reserve the right to refuse service, terminate
accounts, remove or edit content, or cancel orders at their sole discretion."
Is this true? Without needing to cite any reasons whatsoever, is Amazon able
to delete all my books?

Elakkiya:I'm sorry for the inconvenience you had about this. May I place you
on hold for 1 to 2 minutes while I check this for you?

Me:Sure No inconvenience so far for ME just for the person in that article so
I'm asking if it is factually correct

Elakkiya:Thanks for waiting.

Me:sure

Elakkiya:It seems there was some problem with the account. This is the reason
for the account closure.

Me:obviously. :) the appalling thing is that amazon doesn't want to tell her
what problem so my question is: does Amazon not NEED to tell its customers
which problem an account has before closing it? obviously amazon needs to have
the right to close accounts but i'd say in those cases it also has the
responsibility to state why more than a hand-wavy "there were problems"

Elakkiya:May I place you on hold for 1 to 2 minutes while I check this for
you?

Me:sure

Elakkiya:Thanks for waiting.

Me:sure

Elakkiya:On further going through this issue, I see that I need to transfer
your concern to the appropriate department who handle these kind of issues.

Me:ok please do that. will they respond via email then?

Elakkiya:Yes, you should hear back from them in the next 1-2 business days.

Me:great. i assume you have my email since i'm logged in, right?

Elakkiya:Yes,John.

Me:Thanks, Elakkiya. Have a great day!

Elakkiya:You're welcome. Thank you for visiting Amazon.com. We look forward to
seeing you again soon.

------
tux1968
We simply must stop signing all power over to corporations in exchange for use
of their toys. Until people start voting with their wallet, these types of
things will only become more common.

------
wolfhumble
Seems like her account has been opened up again for some reason . . .
<http://goo.gl/MZVzZ> (Norwegian website digi.no via google translate)

------
frobozz
IANAL, but I believe that the Personopplysningsloven is compliant with
Directive 95/46/EC; of which Article 12 has provisions against the behaviour
exhibited by Amazon in this exchange.

------
crististm
Actually, DRM at its finest. Until enough people get screwed by DRM, the R
from DRM will come from Rights instead of Restrictions.

Unfortunately, I see no shortage for stories like this in the future.

------
jonno
I've been on the fence about Kindles for me and the kids. Think this has
tipped the balance. I had heard rumors about how draconian Amazon was being,
seems it was true.

------
russelluresti
This is why it's extremely important to use programs like Calibre to back up
all your Amazon or Nook or whatever else purchases.

------
davidw
I wonder how much this is going to cost them in lost sales.

If everything is as stated - I have no reason to doubt it - it's very
disappointing.

------
lollancf37
Well my Kindle 3G doesn't work anymore, I was planning on buying the new
one... Now I know I won't. Thanks for the reminder

------
donniezazen
Stallman becomes more relevant everyday.

------
olalonde
This guy sounds like a total jerk. Reminds me of some exchanges I had with
Paypal's customer support.

------
jamesaguilar
Oof. That would be horrible. I need to crack the DRM on my books and move them
to a safe place ASAP.

------
shmerl
Breaking DRM and making personal backups should be the first step for those
who use such services.

------
noonespecial
So now corporations also have no-fly lists? Fantastic.

------
jksmith
Need something that hacks Amazon's control of Kindles.

------
amalag
Another reason to buy a Kobo instead of a kindle.

------
atas
That's why we still need local storage.

------
cagenut
This is even more scary for people/startups with their entire business on ec2.

------
lucian303
Well, that's the last time I buy a kindle or any books from Amazon. ePub and
other non-DRM formats exist. Luckily, I have only bough a few books so far
that were not free.

Of course, for the ones willing to search, the truth is out there ... but the
truth is copyrighted. That's what they forgot to mention in the X-Files.

------
celticbadboy
This is something that's always in the back of mind.

Yes the Kindle is awesome, but how hard is it for a bookstore to come to your
house and repossess a book?

------
js951534
Pfft only more reason to use "free" websites for ebook downloads such as
coinread.com

~~~
andyjohnson0
Its a pity that legalreads doesn't provide a way for me to see what they offer
without first giving them access to my google account.

~~~
js951534
See the search bar at top of page that says "Search Books" thats a sample of
the underlying database, you dont need to login to download books from this
site, tho loging in gives more choice, use a disposable account anyways not
your primary its a good security precaution anyways

~~~
andyjohnson0
I tried that and it asked me for my account details. It doesn't seem to be
doing that now, though.

