Ok, this is not a good sign:
Jul. 17th, 2009 08:31 pmAmazon.com deletes purchased copies of Orwell's books from reader's Kindles.
Ok, first of all, this publisher is dumb, and by dumb, I mean, really, really serious dumb. One main takeaway lesson from Readercon is that people there loved their Kindles, wanted everybody else to have a Kindle, did not understand why I did not have a Kindle, and planned to buy all of their books on the Kindle and buy everybody else's books on Kindles. My mother is equally gung ho about her Sony e-reader ("look at all the books I have on it!") leaving me feeling as if I am the only person still craving the marvelous touch of paper. If publishers can offer electronic reader editions of books, they should - otherwise they are missing a large, growing and fervent market.
But dumb though this publisher is, I'm equally concerned about Amazon's move here. When I buy a book, it's because I want to own the book. If I didn't want to own the book, I'd just head to the library. It's bad enough that I can't trade Kindle editions in at a marvelous old used bookstore and then spend time wandering through those stacks looking for books I can spend my credit on (I love used bookstores) although I'll admit that since for me giving up books is kinda like pulling off a fingernail I probably wouldn't have that desire for 99% of whatever I bought on the Kindle I don't even own.
But to buy a book in whatever format and then have the bookstore come in and steal it away from me....
I love paper. Did I mention, loving the marvelous touch of paper?
Update: In the comments,![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
lordsnotrag notes that the books in question were unauthorized texts that somehow slipped through Amazon's system, and Amazon was probably attempting to hold off a lawsuit from the actual rights holders. Which begs the question of how did an unauthorized text jump through Amazon's system in the first place, and also, why didn't Amazon send a quick email to purchasers of this text explaining that this was an unauthorized copy rather than simply deleting it?
Ok, first of all, this publisher is dumb, and by dumb, I mean, really, really serious dumb. One main takeaway lesson from Readercon is that people there loved their Kindles, wanted everybody else to have a Kindle, did not understand why I did not have a Kindle, and planned to buy all of their books on the Kindle and buy everybody else's books on Kindles. My mother is equally gung ho about her Sony e-reader ("look at all the books I have on it!") leaving me feeling as if I am the only person still craving the marvelous touch of paper. If publishers can offer electronic reader editions of books, they should - otherwise they are missing a large, growing and fervent market.
But dumb though this publisher is, I'm equally concerned about Amazon's move here. When I buy a book, it's because I want to own the book. If I didn't want to own the book, I'd just head to the library. It's bad enough that I can't trade Kindle editions in at a marvelous old used bookstore and then spend time wandering through those stacks looking for books I can spend my credit on (I love used bookstores) although I'll admit that since for me giving up books is kinda like pulling off a fingernail I probably wouldn't have that desire for 99% of whatever I bought on the Kindle I don't even own.
But to buy a book in whatever format and then have the bookstore come in and steal it away from me....
I love paper. Did I mention, loving the marvelous touch of paper?
Update: In the comments,
lordsnotrag notes that the books in question were unauthorized texts that somehow slipped through Amazon's system, and Amazon was probably attempting to hold off a lawsuit from the actual rights holders. Which begs the question of how did an unauthorized text jump through Amazon's system in the first place, and also, why didn't Amazon send a quick email to purchasers of this text explaining that this was an unauthorized copy rather than simply deleting it?