[sf-lug] [Fwd: [FSF] Amazon, 1984, and what we're doing about it.]

[Rohen Peterson]

Rick,

I'm agreeing with much of what you are saying. I just wanted to point out
that if Amazon changes their system to prevent reclaiming sold products, the
DRM argument doesn't really factor in here.

I'm not familiar enough with the Kindle's licensing to argue on if they can
legally take the book back or not.

Rohen Peterson


On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 13:10, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:

> Quoting Rohen Peterson (peterson.rohen at gmail.com):
>
> > I don't believe the issue is purely DRM. Amazon can't sell illegally
> copied
> > material, with or without DRM.
>
> Suppose a bookstore sold you a book.  Then, a week later, you find a
> note on the bookshelf in the living room saying the bookstore determined
> that the publisher lacked legal rights to publish that book in your
> country, and therefore had entered your living room during the night to
> take the book back.  On top of the note, you found exact change
> equalling what you'd spent.  (Checking the original receipt, you also
> found fine print saying that customer premises are considered part of
> the store, and occasionally books must be removed from the store for
> various business reasons.)
>
> Would you be a bit put out?  I would.
>
> The bookstore, upon finding out that it's sold some number of customers
> including me books to which a publisher had lacked legal rights, might
> have a small tort problem.  So might the publisher.
>
> However, their seizing the book back from me -- without a court order
> and some sheriff's deputies to implement it -- strikes me as moderately
> insane and not to be tolerated.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20090721/7a9ca9ed/attachment.html>