Media, Technology, and Education
DangersMediaSociety

New Kindle Developments

I was talking to my dad tonight about the Kindle.  He’s a fan and wants one, but feels as though he doesn’t read enough to justify the expense.  I’ve written about the Kindle before and have said that I have a problem with Amazon’s high pricing of electronic books.  Now Amazon has screwed up in another way and I have mixed feelings about that.

Recently, Amazon removed all traces of the digital versions of two of George Orwell’s classic novels, 1984 and Animal Farm, from their web site so that Kindle users can no longer purchase them.  That action is not controversial.  Amazon’s other actions, however, are controversial.  Amazon also removed all digital traces of the novels from the Kindle devices of users who had purchased the novels.  It turns out that the publisher who sold Amazon the rights to distribute the novels did not actually own the copyrights (in the US) for them.  When Amazon determined that they were illegally selling the digital version of the novel, they stopped selling it.  But they also retroactively removed the digital versions of the novels from those who had purchased it.  People in the blogosphere writing about this issue have conflicting ideas concerning Amazon’s reaction.  Some are outraged while others think Amazon did the right thing.

The difference in these two points of view comes down to values.  Those who think Amazon did the right thing liken this to the police confiscating a stolen car from your driveway.  You never had the right to own the item, whether you purchased it knowing it was stolen or not  Those who think Amazon did the wrong thing believe that the users had purchased the item in what they thought was a legal manner and, therefore, Amazon should have left well enough alone.  In fact, many are making the argument that situations such as this are arguments against digital distribution of content since the ownership of digital content is so ephemeral.  The truth seems to be somewhere in between these two extremes, I think.  There are two reasons that this is not the same as the police confiscating a stolen car.  First, Amazon had a duty to determine that they were selling a legal product.  They failed in this duty and should be held liable in some way for that failure.  Second, once Amazon discovered their error in illegally selling the product, they were less than forthcoming about the remedy.  They did refund the purchase price of the novel but they didn’t clearly explain what had happened and clearly notify those who had purchased the novels that they were being removed.  Instead, Amazon surreptitiously removed the novels from the Kindle devices.  That’s wrong.  On the other hand, Amazon is not the devil in this situation.  They honored the copyright of the novels and, most importantly, they refunded the purchase price.  They tried to do the right thing.

As in so many situations, the real issue here seems to be about Amazon’s lack of forthrightness about the issue once it was discovered.  The cover-up of the crime once again turns out to be worse than the crime itself.  Did we learn nothing from Watergate?

Article written by:

I am currently Professor of Digital Media at Plymouth State University in Plymouth, NH. I am also the current Coordinator of General Education at the University. I am interested in game studies, digital literacies, open pedagogies, and generally how technology impacts our culture.

3 Comments

  1. Sit10

    Are you able to explain HOW they did it? was it during the sync-up process, or just what? I haven’t been able to understand how they removed it from people’s devices once the file was downloaded. That is the part that sort of creeps me out.

  2. Cathie LeBlanc

    It’s a good question. My guess is that the Kindle’s storage is available via the cell technology as long as it is turned on. It makes sense that cell technology is two-way, right? I bet each Kindle contacts the mothership when it is turned on (creepy). So the convenience in downloading anywhere, anytime (so heavily hyped by Amazon as a plus for Kindle users) probably worked to Amazon’s advantage in this situation. Since Amazon keeps a record of all purchases their Kindle users make (in case the books need to be re-downloaded), it was probably just a matter of waiting until a particular Kindle was powered up (at which time it made contact with Amazon’s servers). In order to allow downloading of newly purchased novels, Amazon has to have permission to modify the contents of the storage area of each Kindle–deleting is not so different than downloading. Seems like it would be an easily automated task.

  3. Pingback: » Kindle Again Desert of My Real Life

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Creative Commons License Licensed by Cathie LeBlanc under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
https://cathieleblanc.com/2009/07/18/new-kindle-developments/
cathieleblanc.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-49
69727
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:RL2GBW5GP4HYO5TYVOTSMVVAQY6MXI25
<urn:uuid:f3d8e766-b319-4902-a032-3f4ebe21e1e6>
2022-12-09T05:22:07Z
207.154.223.24
text/html
sha1:R6OTWNLNGHXMRG7ET2E54UXSBZSBQNGH
<urn:uuid:0e52b4a5-a1fa-452c-8814-cf99b8ae796d>
https://cathieleblanc.com/2009/07/18/new-kindle-developments/
response
<urn:uuid:d4b1440d-f8f4-43eb-8413-41e5132d6585>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-49
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for November/December 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-111
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/