Amazon Settles Kindle Lawsuit Over Deleted Copy of "1984" for $150,000

9

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

ronf57

OK first MESIAH you think too highly of yourself and your opinion and you version of the law.

1) AMAZON was wrong( read broke the law) for selling something that they illegally offered for sale.

2) under many states laws, it is illegal to reach into someones device/computer/network and remove, or tamper with the contents. (read broke the law again)

3) yes they were correct in refunding the purchase price for something they had no rights to see. (read restitution)

4) they offered a replacement copy of the item, albeit not in the form the user wanted for free to the user.(read who cares, if i buy a sports car because i like to go fast and you exchange it for a yugo we do not have a agreement do we? even offered for free if i dont want clutter of physical books and want to read in a convienient device that's my choice not yours---very little points for attempt amazon)

5) the $30 and the $150k settlement were amazons attempt to TRY to avoid massive reprocussions both leaglly and socially. the $30 paid was a refund and sorry fee. The $150k was in part a punitive damages claim. (read don't do that again-you were wrong amazon)

6) some states may still file lagal action against amazon for computer invasion, and they would be right to do so. WE CANNOT FOR WHATEVER REASON HAVE ANYONE REMOVING ANYTHING FROM OUR COMPUTERS WITHOUT OUR EXPRESS KNOWLEDGE AND PERMISSION. The RIAA would pull all your music, the MPAA would pull your videos and software companies would pull well, your software. ALL OF THEM COULD PULL THESE CLAIMING THE DIDNT SEE SOME IDENTIFYING CODE SAYING IT WAS THE PRISTINE ORIGINAL ONLY COPY.

Wanna guess what might come from your mouth when you realize something has been deleted unbeknownst to you that you NEED or want to use? It wouldn't be thank you i am certain.

So amazon is riding a razor blade edge with this...just like sony did with their invasive anti-piracy software install on their cds a few years ago.

WE CANNOT ALLOW ANYONE TO DO THESE TYPES OF THINGS. 

avatar

knight2001

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

I somewhat agree with all the comment posted here. The irony
of it all is that the book was 1984 that got swiped from Kindle users without their
permission. I don't think that Amazon had the right, however to take it back.
The comments about it being stolen property are true, but where were the police
in all this. If a pawn shop buys an illegal item, then the police will
confiscate it. Same with a stolen car or other item, as far as I know, Amazon doesn’t
have police powers and as such should have gotten the authorities involved in
the removal of the digital books via legal means. Also, if Amazon was in the
right, why pay off these 2 to make it go away. Too many people roll up into a
ball and give in even if they are right just to make things go away.

avatar

rseding91

I just don't get Kindles..

As far as I can tell - anyone techie enough to buy-download-and read a book on a Kindle isn't going to WANT to read a book. Let alone read one on a Kindle.

avatar

mesiah

Wait... The company admitted it made a mistake, replaced everyone's illegal copy with a legal version, refunded what everyone had paid for the original, AND cut a check for $30 to every person who purchased the original? And two money grubbing bastards still threatened with a law suit? AND were actually paid $150k to go away? Between all of the BS copyright battles, out of control malpractice suits, and people just trying to use the system to get rich quick, the American justice system is a joke. I know everyone was up in arms about this when it happened, but I can't imagine there are many people who would say that amazon didn't go above and beyond to apologize for its mistake, and to set clear boundaries to make sure that a similar incident doesn't occur in the future. If only this were the movies, I'm sure some meteor would fall out of the sky and smite both of these money grubbing asshats shortly after they got their check.

avatar

goku1gk4

They replaced the book that they remotely deleted from thousands of peoples personal possessions after people freaked out and made a fuss because they did it in the first place. They never went "above and beyond to apologize" they were forced to set those boundaries, if left to themselves no changes would have taken place. Buying a book makes it yours, just because it's digital doesn't give amazon the right to take it back. If a bookstore started accidentally selling illegal copies of a book would it be ok for them to just hunt down and take the copies they sold without giving any warning to the book's current owners? It should be a problem for Amazon to have to deal with, not their customers. I would have jumped on the lawsuit bandwagon if I had the chance.

avatar

mesiah

Step back and take another look. Nobody MADE amazon do what they did. Sure, there was some outrage from some people, but no one stepped in and told amazon they had to give the books back. Now, if you want to talk about real law, and not just shoot out opinions based on how you feel, here is how the real world works. If you want to consider the digital copies of this book a tangible object that amazon sold you, and base your theory on that, consider the following. Amazon had no right to sell the book, in essence, it was stolen property. If I sell you stolen property, and authorities find out that you are in possession of stolen property, do you know what happens? Thats right, they come and take it from you. It doesn't legally belong to you because the person you bought it from did not have the right to sell it in the first place. Hell, I might as well stop you on the street, sell you a car parked on the curb, then bust the window and hot wire it so you can drive it away. When the cops stop you a few miles down the road and you say "This is mine, I paid for it." They'll laugh at you, and throw both of us in jail. In this case people were unaware that they were buying stolen goods, and amazon was unaware at the time that they were selling stolen goods as a middle man, so you are most likely freed from any legal responsibility, and with some good lawyers amazon is probably free also. Whether or not you had the book in your possession is irrelevant as it never really belonged to you.

If amazon didn't have the right to sell the book, and they refunded your purchase price, I think they would have met any legal responsibility in court when it comes to the end users. So no, I don't think amazon HAD to do what they did. Refund the money, yes. Acquire a legal version and provide it free of charge to those affected, no but an honorable gesture and not out of the question. Also pay each person effected $30 for the inconvenience of losing their data until the legal version could be supplied, absolutely above and beyond. A lawsuit for whatever ridiculous amount these people were asking for stems from nothing but greed. But I suppose you will tell me that losing a digital copy of a book screwed your life up and $75k is the only thing that will fill the emotional void you now feel. Yes, amazon paid them $150k to go away, because thats like a drop in the bucket to them, but the kind of money people today attempt to extort from frivolous law suits should in its self be illegal.

avatar

Muerte

Your right and your wrong.  Amazon just didn't think it through on several fronts. 

They provided an illegal copy of a book.  Whether they knew or didn't is irrelevant from a cutomer service perspective.

The things they really did wrong were;

  • A. give themselves access to all Kindles.  If its in the EULA then that part should be Boldfaced and capitalized.
  • B. Used that access.
  • C. Used the access without asking permission of the users. The big one here.  Big privacy violation.

Whether they compensated anyone for this is also irrelevant.

Now they just look like they are trying to sweep the whole thing under the rug before too many people ask "They have access to my Kindle without me knowing it?"  Afterall it is just a dummied down laptop.

avatar

festiva_man

You are absolutely right.  Amazon just did the right thing here.  This stuff happens in pawn shops constantly.  Man walks in and sells something stolen, shop sells it, and police have to go and take it from the person that bought it.  Pawn shops don't deal with PR so they hardly ever give back the money and if they do give it back then they are just out because the original thief sure doesn't pay them back.

avatar

fnordfnord

Except Amazon is not the police.  They're a private commercial entity whose rights go no farther than the pawn shop.  This is more akin to the pawn shop selling you something they didn't know was stolen and then walking into your house to retrieve it without your permission.  Quite a few of us were surprised that not only did they build a secret door into our house, but also that they thought so little of us as customers that they didn't even consider that it might be a bad idea to use it. 

I'd love a Kindle, but Amazon lost me on this.  

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.