Just read your updates. Happy I could add something. I would say I agree with your first update, for the most part – if the publisher had actually uploaded the content. But, they didn't. The rights holder did not make this copy available on Amazon.com, when it is their right to determine how the work is distributed. Because someone made the books available, who had no right to, Amazon.com had no right to sell them and, as such, the consumer had no right to buy them. It would be like, for example, if a random person submitted my book to Amazon.com and started selling it to Kindle users.

As Robert Scoble pointed out, if you buy a stolen TV, the police are breaking into your house to get it back. I'm not saying books are like TVs or anything of the sort, but it's still true. There's no “swiping” going on here, unless you consider the police example to also be “swiping” or “theft.” If you buy stolen merchandise, even from a reputably retailer, it is not unrealistic to think that you might have to give it back, whether that retailer is physical or digital.

As far as how long consumers put up with it… I think consumers have to be understanding. One could argue that Amazon.com should have done a better job validating this work and maybe that is true, but that solution on the whole does not scale. Amazon.com cannot validate submitted works against popular literature as that list is limitless – Amazon.com cannot validate submitted works against less than popular literature because that list is even longer. Perhaps they could validate submitted works against the top X best selling books of all time, but you have to see where that has it's limits.

The Kindle has provided a great thing in many forms and has made a lot of great strides. But, you also must accept that people will try to take advantage of it for their gain in a way that Amazon.com will be unable to protect. It's similar to an online forums scenario where we can moderate our very best, but posts still make it in there that violate someone's rights, perhaps. Yes there are bad posts on good forums, but does that invalidate forums? Does that make the staff at the site bad?

At any rate, in the linked article, Amazon.com did say that: “We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers' devices in these circumstances.” Keep in mind this is no small feat and I will be interested to see if they can actually negotiate that. Someone uploads an unauthorized copy, you buy it, they'll let you keep it and somehow, presumably, get the money to the rights holder, even if they didn't want the book distributed digitally? Wow. I'm wondering how they'll pull that off. Amazon.com's ability to open publishers up a bit like this should be applauded just as much as this misstep – the greatest misstep here may have been in communication.

Just my thoughts.

Thanks,

Patrick

In this case, I agree with Amazon.com's course of action. Not necessarily every aspect, because I don't know all of the story of how they communicated, etc. But, buying something illegally doesn't entitle you to it.

Now, Amazon could have done a better job letting customers know. Perhaps a courtesy e-mail? Or giving customers the chance to swap the book for another title? At least they gave people their money back. I just think they should handle this is a different way next time this happens.

With all of that said, I don't like it, either. Of course, we have to note here that there is more than just Amazon.com that is a party to this, but the publishers and representative bodies, as well. Amazon.com has done great things with the Kindle, things it doesn't always get credit for, and I hope that they'll be able to negotiate with publishers to protect the integrity of a legitimate sale.

Patrick