Dave
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 2:18 AM
To: ip
Subject: [IP] Update on Kindle book removals
Doesn't sound as nefarious as first considered. Instead, Amazon seems to be protecting itself from a copyright claim.
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Ronald J Riley \(RJR Com\)" <rjr@rjriley.com>
Date: July 18, 2009 7:54:12 AM EDT
To: <dave@farber.net>
Subject: RE: [IP] Update on Kindle book removals
"Doesn't sound as nefarious as first considered."
Lets see, Amazon unilaterally reached into customers' machines and removed content. Would we tolerate any company reaching into our computers to "remove liability"?
I am ranking the Kindle with Apple junk, and will buy neither. Both act like Big Brother.
Ronald J Riley
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 2:18 AM
To: ip
Subject: [IP] Update on Kindle book removals
Begin forwarded message:
From: David Ian Hopper <imhopper@gmail.com>
Date: July 17, 2009 9:42:02 PM EDT
To: dave@farber.net
Subject: Update on Kindle book removals
Update 2: Drew Herdener, Amazon.com's Director of Communications, pinged us directly with the following comment, and now things are starting to make a lot more sense. Seems as if the books were added initially by an outfit that didn't even have the rights!
These books were added to our catalog using our self-service platform by a third-party who did not have the rights to the books. When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from customers' devices, and refunded customers. We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers' devices in these circumstances.
