Gawker 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 1:47 PM
Sat Dec 19
24 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip Your Editors:
Tipline: 646-214-8138
Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder |
West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield |
Contributing Editors:
Valleywag:
Ryan Tate |
Media:
Hamilton Nolan |
Politics:
Alex Pareene |
Investigations:
John Cook |
Entertainment:
Brian Moylan |
Nights:
Adrian Chen |
Azaria Jagger |
Ravi Somaiya |
Weekends:
Foster Kamer |
Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/07/09
10/07/09
10/07/09
10/07/09
10/07/09
10/07/09
10/07/09
07/24/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/24/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
But if you take that to an extreme that would preclude buying a PC, DVD player or even modern TV equipment.
The problem is with content that is encumbered, not the devices themselves (in most cases).
I use iTunes (as well as a Linux equivalent) but have very little in the way of iTunes store purchased music. I mostly have ripped my own CDs, and in a few cases where I downloaded music from Apple I've taken the extra time to convert that to MP3 as well.
Amazon purchased a company Mobipocket:
http://www.mobipocket.com/freebooks/default.aspx
and as far as I can tell pretty mch shut down their new conversions of public domain works to e-reader format, but still offer the already converted titles in their store for $0. Seem sort of stupid to me as there are several other organizations still busily converting content to various e-reader formats:
http://manybooks.net
http://www.feedbooks.com
Whenever possible I get my public domain works from such locations and if possible save them in a couple of different formats so that when something better than the Kindle comse along I'll have little trouble switching.
Of course if you are a consumer of modern junk fiction there might be reason for concern. If previously you were building a library of hardbacks, I'd continue doing that. If you are a paperback pack-rat however, take a look at your oldest ones and see how they are holding up. Mine crumbled, and I figure buying a Kindle version of such a book is not much more risky than trusting a paper publisher to use good paper and glue (they don't).
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/24/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
Of course, it would be interesting to see the extent to which a terms of service contract would protect Amazon against a class action lawsuit about this kind of thing. After all, I'm sure one can't include a clause in such a contract stipulating that "If the user breaks this contract, we get to kill his/her dog, or in the case that he/she does not own a dog, the dog of his/her closest kin." There must be some kind of limitation to Amazon's legal coverage. Also, there's been a lot of buzz lately about small print in loan agreements. I'm sure this is exactly the kind of small print that nobody reads, and moreover, nobody reasonably expects that they have agreed to when they sign on the dotted line.
It would be interesting to see just how many Kindle owners knew that, according to their terms of service, Amazon could go into their Kindles and erase any e-book they wanted.
07/23/09
I still argue Amazon was right to delete the books, which were obtained in violation of copyright laws. The issue is that Amazon completely botched this situation -- but they were legitimate in deleting the books.
And Ryan, shame on you. It was legitimate to criticize Amazon in the first place, but this is just snarky piling on done for cheap page views. Perhaps your time would have been spent accurately reporting the purchase price of Zappos -- you were only $20 million off.
07/24/09
The point here is not whether Amazon has the "right" to do this. Okay, so the book was "stolen." I suppose people should give it back. (Of course, if they had been paper books there would have been no real way of recalling them, but whatever.)
The point is that Amazon shouldn't be able to turn books on and off like this in the first place. Are we buying books or licensing them from Amazon? Obviously the answer is the second, but should we be happy about this?
Yes, Amazon has every right to specify whatever terms it wants when it "sells" books, but the reason people are upset about is because of the way corporations like Amazon (and of course Microsoft etc etc etc before them) are screwing with our ideas of ownership while we're not paying much attention. There's good reason to make a stink now, before the new rules of digital ownership are set in stone.
Or you could just be an apologist for a totally fucked up corporation that's looking out for nobody's best interests but their own! SHAME ON YOU Gawker or anyone else who criticizes this great institution!
07/24/09
If you don't like DRM, then don't buy a device that uses it. That's the beauty of the market!
07/23/09
07/23/09
What I hope ends up happening is that Zappos' prices fall in line with Endless'. You used to be able to find some really terrific deals at Zappos (and I once got a hand-written thank you card from them -- I seriously touted them to anyone who would listen after that!), but more recently you can find the exact same shoes on BlueFly for less. And BlueFly's hardly THE discount emporium of the internet.
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/18/09