Amazon sued for wrecking teen's Kindle work

[RamboLiberal]

Source: CBC News

A Michigan teenager is launching a class-action lawsuit against online book retailer Amazon, alleging the company rendered his study notes on George Orwell's 1984 useless when it deleted the novel from his and other customers' Kindle e-book readers earlier in July.

Justin D. Gawronski, 17, "now needs to recreate all of his studies," alleges the complaint filed Thursday in Seattle by the law firm KamberEdelson, LLC.

Gawronski took copious notes using the Kindle that were linked to particular passages in the book, the court document says, and while those notes are still accessible, they are useless without the passages they reference.

Amazon has apologized for remotely deleting copies of 1984 and another Orwell novel, Animal Farm, in mid-July without informing customers.

Jay Edelson, the lead attorney in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the plaintiffs "appreciate Amazon.com's new-found contrition, but words are not enough. Amazon.com had no more right to hack into people's Kindles than its customers have the right to hack into Amazon's bank account to recover a mistaken overpayment."


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/07/31/tech-amazon-lawsuit-student-1984-kindle-gawronski.html

[Tangerine LaBamba]

1. Wouldn't George Orwell

just get the biggest kick out of all of this?

Now, the inevitable litigation.

Ah, it gets better and better..............................

[BelleCarolinaPeridot]

2. OMG does his fingers not hurt?

How hard would it be to buy a copy of this book at a used book store for $2 or less?

[RamboLiberal]

3. Problem is he lost his links to the passages

Amazon cost the kid a helluva a lot of research work. I'd be pissed too.

[mackerel]

4. The notes are far more important than the text.

[Buzz Clik]

5. Or a parchment. Or maybe the local poet could recite it to him.

Welcome to the 21st century.

[Wickerman]

7. I have no trust in a company that would go into my personal machine

and do cleanup. Perhaps that is this guys point.

[NYC_SKP]

9. Microsoft does it routinely, go into your personal machine, I'm pretty sure of this.

I rarely use my PC laptop, but recently a window began popping up asking me if I want to use their quality assurance gizmo to check if I'm using certified Windows software (or some such crap), and I don't.

But I assume that they check versions in use and that other entities or agencies are scanning what mp3 files we've downloaded.

Am I paranoid?

I know they CAN do it, so I'll assume they DO do it.

:scared:

[pocoloco]

15. It's not his fingers that has pain

it's his ass!

[Posteritatis]

19. Amazon deleted *his* work, not just the book. (nt)

[Odin2005]

29. Wow, the Luddite Brigade came out fast.

:eyes:

[timeforpeace]

6. Bet mom or dad are lawyers.

[riderinthestorm]

8. Geez, I just signed up for Barnes and Noble's e-books. Free!

More than a million titles (Kindle has about 250k), cheaper e-book prices, and you can download them to anything electronic that gets wi-fi, anywhere - cell phone, laptop etc. And the download is free. You don't have to buy the stupid Kindle product.

[kirby]

10. Class-action?

What did this impact, like 6 people? Certainly not class worthy.

[harmonicon]

11. ha!

Is this the first you've heard of this? This impacted many people - the only people who would have the exact numbers would be Amazon, and I don't know if they'll fess up about it or not.

[kirby]

12. I own a Kindle...

I'm aware of the story when it happened, but my point is how many people lost their 'annotations' to the few Orwell titles? Surely not enough to form a 'class'. I still cant imagine more than 6 people had notes/annotations of the 2 or 3 Orwell books and were impacted by the loss.

[RamboLiberal]

13. Not just about the notes but that Amazon

intruded on the owner's Kindles to delete a book without their permission.

Jay Edelson, the lead attorney in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the plaintiffs "appreciate Amazon.com's new-found contrition, but words are not enough. Amazon.com had no more right to hack into people's Kindles than its customers have the right to hack into Amazon's bank account to recover a mistaken overpayment."

[kirby]

14. Yeah, but that is a different story...

And since Amazon issued a full refund for the book there are no damages to sue for (other than the lost annotations/notes).

[harmonicon]

16. it has nothing to do with the notes

The notes are just a tangible symbol of Amazon's violation of their contract, and quite likely the rights of their customers. Part of me thinks that anyone foolish enough to think they could buy and own information was shown the truth sooner rather than later, and got burned lightly now so as to not lose far more in the future, but a big part of me just thinks "fuck the crooks".

[kirby]

17. Its more complicated than that...

First off, anyone who buys 'DRM' laden stuff should expect this type of overlord crap. However people rollover and accept iTunes DRM or eBook DRM. People didn't learn their lesson with now defunct DIVX or MSN Music Store.
Personally, I only use PDF files on the Kindle DX and do not purchase DRM stuff.

Its complicated because Amazon allows third-party independent publishers to publish their own works. Unfortunately someone abused this feature and published the Orwell books that they had no legal right to publish.
Obviously Amazon should have done more verification to prevent this, but they didn't. Once Orwells estate (who are pretty litigious), reported to Amazon that the third-party publisher was selling his works, Amazon used the technology to 'recall' the book and issue a full refund. Yeah, Amazon handled it pretty poorly and it was a horrible PR, but they have said they learned a lesson and wont do it again. We will see. I'm not sure what they did was wrong. I mean that were technically selling 'stolen merchandise'. In the physical world they would not come into your house and take back the book, but we are not dealing with the physical world--we are dealing with the good and bad of a DRM based ebook system.

[harmonicon]

22. don't assume that other people are as smart and/or informed as yourself

I agree that people should know what they're getting when they agree to pay money for any DRM crap, but this wasn't as simple as that either. As I understand it, nowhere in the customers' contract - including various DRM mumbo-jumbo - with Amazon is it stated that Amazon reserves the right to remove content in exchange for the purchase price. Even when considering that paying for DRM protected crap is more like renting than buying, this is more like coming into someone's house and taking a book than the MSN music store going belly-up. I used to work at a video store, and when I rented out a DVD I couldn't just go to someone's house and take a DVD back and give them their $3 and have everything be ok.

[Retrograde]

25. there were other solutions

The customers bought the rights to the text in good faith. Amazon could have paid the royalties to the Orwell estate, then gone after the 3rd party to make good (as a teeny tiny Amazon seller I can attest that Amazon has some access to seller assets), maybe refusing further sales until the affair is settled. Amazon could also do better due diligence about whether sellers have the right to sell what they do. They take a big enough cut of the sale for very little effort on their part.

[truthisfreedom]

18. That's an apt comparison. Love it. I actually feel I have the right to hack into Amazon to recover

theoretically mistaken overpayments.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

20. how Orwellian n/t

[Norrin Radd]

21. I find it odd, but not surprising, that everyone seemed to think

that Amazon's Kindle was the first and only e-ink reader. There are far better readers that existed before the Kindle, and aren't hindered by DRM, such as iLiad, and Cybook.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e-book_readers

[Frank Cannon]

23. My wife and I have been using eReader on the Palm for ages

I never could find out what the big deal was about the Kindle. I always figured Amazon could, and would, pull shit like this.

[kirby]

27. The big deal is the display...

The display is larger than a palm device and uses an e-ink technology display which has very low power consumption and very high dot per inch (dpi) resolution to reduce eye strain/fatigue. The display works under conditions just like a sheet of paper so you can read it sitting on the beach in bright sunlight without the glare of an LCD display. I can barely see my PDA in those conditions. The ebook battery charge will last for several days, but a PDA for several hours.

[Frank Cannon]

33. The Palm display , battery charge, etc., never bothered us

My wife likes to read in the dark before going to sleep.

And to me, the DRM nonsense outweighs any other Kindle advantages. I can redownload (for free) books I bought off e-Reader years ago.

[kirby]

26. I disagree somewhat...

The only reason I bought the Kindle DX was for the decent PDF file support. From monitoring the market for several years, the irex iLiad, which I had always hoped would improve, is an expensive device with crappy software and even crappier customer support.

For people who want to purchase DRM protected stuff (most current content like NY Times Bestsellers), the Kindle opened up a huge new world/demand that pushed publishers to participate. The Sony reader helped, but I think the Kindle really moved the publishers forward to embracing the ebook format on their newest books.

[customerserviceguy]

24. I don't have a Kindle

but isn't there some way of saving your work?

And if there isn't, can I sue Democratic Underground for deleting a topic that I wrote some of my finest rants on? (anybody get my point here?)

[depakid]

28. I get the point that Amazon blew it and made damn sure a lot of folks won't buy into Kindle

[customerserviceguy]

30. That's one point

the other is, if your "work product" cannot be saved, then whatever you do on something that doesn't fully belong to you (the terms and conditions that come with the product define that) is just like a sandcastle on the edge of the beach at low tide.

It's always good to find a device that can be 'hacked' to make it belong to the user, not the assclowns who 'license' it to your temporary use.

[TheWatcher]

31. Of course no one has bothered asking the question why Amazon wants to delete those SPECIFIC Books

But hey, that's not important I guess.

[Retrograde]

32. the copyright owners don't seem to want electronic versions

it's their decision as to whether they want these books published and available in electronic form, and who should distribute them. Legally, Amazon can not offer these versions for sale.

[TheWatcher]

35. Thanks for the explanation.

That would seem reasonable.

You do have to admit though, censorship is so blatant these days, so overt, you must question things like this when they are that specific.

It doesn't really matter WHICH Party is in power, or who holds the Puppet Strings.

Those in control do not want The Public Thinking, Questioning, or Reasoning outside of the "Accepted Paradigms" that have been established.

That does not seem to be the case here, but nevertheless, it is a constant theme.

[steven johnson]

34. I do hate corporate 'big brothers' nt