[Novalug] The pen is mightier then the sword ...

[JRR]

ACHTUNG !!!     Ich weiss nichts !!!  Sargent Schultz. "I know nothing!!"

or in other words -- keep an offline copy of anything you value, and 
only view it when
you're  "unplugged"  that goes for Led Zeppelin sourced from YT also......
In every generation there will be the turtles - like Time-Life Music.....
and then there will be those that take up the new to achieve heights 
never dreamed of
before --- Avril Lavigne's  video of the song "Hot" available in 8 
languages with over
177 million hits on YouTube....  they actually rolled over the counter a 
few weeks ago....
Of COurse I was only viewing this video regularly to see how high the 
counter would go..
honest...


Rich Goodwin wrote:
> NEIN!
>
> Seriously, the action is not in the same category.  From what I read,
> 1984 & Animal Farm (any others??) were pulled because "that the books
> were added to the Kindle store by a company that did not have rights to
> them, using a self-service function."  This is a very different argument
> from "Der Aktion wider den undeutschen Geist."  
>
> Couple of points to make:
>    1. It is not clear if the company that posted it was
>       the owner or not.
>    2. It was a private company not the government or any 
>       arm of the government that took the action.
>    3. Buyers appear to have been informed - but not given
>       a choice.
>    4. Amazon does have the right (and has exercised it in
>       the past) to delete unlawful books.
>
> My biggest issue with the digital versions of things is we all to often
> license them and do not own them.  I suspect this was the driving legal
> fact.  It directly answers your Barns and Noble question.  BN buys (aka
> owns) the hardcopy books.  Yes - there are   copyright laws prohibiting
> unlawful copying but, BN owns the physical books.  They sell you the
> hardcopies.  In doing so, ownership transfers to you.  In fact,
> ownership is somewhat based on physical possession.  This contradicts
> some reports that 
>    Amazon’s published terms of service agreement for the Kindle does not
>    appear to give the company the right to delete purchases after they
>    have been made. It says Amazon grants customers the right to keep a
>    “permanent copy of the applicable digital content.”
>
> I think one big point is that is appears Amazon learned.  They stated
> “We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove
> books from customers’ devices in these circumstances.”
>
> So, back to "Der Aktion wider den undeutschen Geist."  I see these
> separate and distinct issues.  I do, however, agree - the risk  for
> abuse and manipulation is there.  Especially since most end users did
> not know Amazon had 
>    a) the right to delete books that were paid for, 
>    b) had the technical ability to delete books and, most importantly,
>    c) had the desire to do so!
>
> We are now forewarned.  We understand Library concerns with digital
> versions and DRM.  Now we, as technologists, can give empirical data to
> novice users to say you must backup your data and protect it - and they
> will understand!
>
> Rich
>
>
> On Sat, 2009-07-18 at 06:48 -0400, Varol Okan wrote:
>   
>> You probably heard about the George Orwell disaster on the Kindle ( 
>> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/07/17/2138213/Amazon-Pulls-Purchased-E-Book-Copies-of-1984-and-Animal-Farm 
>> )
>>  .. and may I add 1984 off all books ...
>>
>> So this sets off an immediately allergic reaction to my German history 
>> classes. The Nazis organized several "Buecherverbrennungen" under the 
>> title "Aktion wider den undeutschen Geist" ( action against the 
>> un-German spirit ).
>> /
>> /This was done for a very good ( read evil ) reason as the Nazis were 
>> trying to control what Germans were allowed to read. The rest is history 
>> so to say.
>>
>> The kindle allows to get the exact same result without the fire. A mass 
>> extinction of knowledge and suppression of opposing ( political or 
>> otherwise ) opinions. What ever happened to the first amendment ?
>>
>> So the question is; isn't that the same as if a "Barns and Noble" 
>> employee comes into your house and removes some books off your shelfs 
>> and giving you a refund simply because the one side of the deal ( buying 
>> a book ) wants to get out of it ?
>>
>> What would you say/do in this situation ?
>> /
>>
>> Varol Okan
>> Ps. //"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"
>> /
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Novalug mailing list
>> Novalug at calypso.tux.org
>> http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/novalug
>>     
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Novalug mailing list
>> Novalug at calypso.tux.org
>> http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/novalug
>>     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://calypso.tux.org/pipermail/novalug/attachments/20090719/dcc68ff1/attachment.html