4 ms·

I'm a little unclear why you are referencing patent law. Anyhow, it seems strange that you feel like you have a right to something produced by someone else. I

by Travis 15y ago

I'm a little unclear why you are referencing patent law. Anyhow, it seems strange that you feel like you have a right to something produced by someone else. I'm not sure they should be able to make laws making circumvention illegal. But, aren't you complaining because you can't access someone else's work in a manner that you think is convenient? The whole "our rights are being squashed because I can't share my ebook with you" argument reeks a little too much of entitlement for me to get behind it.

hxa7241 15y ago
This whole 'entitlement' angle is just wrong thinking here. The fundamental is that technological advance has given us something good, that we did not have before, for free. The sensible question is, how can we best benefit from it. Are we entitled to the invention of the car? Are we entitled to comfortably travel at faster than walking pace? The question seems meaningless, let alone unhelpful.
- Travis 15y ago
  I don't think that's necessarily the sensible question. Aamazon built the kindle. It is their to decide what to do with it. You and I have no right to usurp their product because we want to alter the benefit. If you don't like the DRM or the features, don't use the product, or start a competitor to the Kindle. Please don't expand my comment to any other industries. There are certain safety and utility businesses that require regulation. I don't think being able to electronically download a book over a propriety network using a proprietary device (that someone chose to purchase) is one of those.
  - d2zo 15y ago
    If it comes to be that a significant majority of the book market is locked by DRM schemes, then no, Amazon ought not have the right to do as they please, and a regulatory agency should be established to ensure fair and equitable access to the materials. Education, water, electricity, communication, and healthcare are all fine and proper examples of what happens when incumbents reach "escape velocity" and their past innovations turn into today's rent seeking.
nate_meurer 15y ago
Entitlement is indeed a pretty useless concept in this context. Are you "entitled" to lend a paper book to someone. Publisher say no, and they are backed up with the force of law in some countries. Are you "entitled" to read a book out loud? The Authors Guild says no. Are you "entitled" to sing a song out loud? ASCAP says no. Are you "entitled" to sell a CD that you own? Music publishers say no. Eventually I'll might get to something to which you do think you are "entitled", and smart money bets there is someone in the content industry who wants to deprive you of it, and someone in the legislature willing to make you a criminal if you if you try. The slippery slpe has been well documented for a long time. BTW, if you haven't already recognized it, this discussion is about much more than just Amazon's TOS.

by Travis 15y ago

hxa7241 15y ago

This whole 'entitlement' angle is just wrong thinking here. The fundamental is that technological advance has given us something good, that we did not have before, for free. The sensible question is, how can we best benefit from it. Are we entitled to the invention of the car? Are we entitled to comfortably travel at faster than walking pace? The question seems meaningless, let alone unhelpful.

Travis 15y ago
I don't think that's necessarily the sensible question. Aamazon built the kindle. It is their to decide what to do with it. You and I have no right to usurp their product because we want to alter the benefit. If you don't like the DRM or the features, don't use the product, or start a competitor to the Kindle. Please don't expand my comment to any other industries. There are certain safety and utility businesses that require regulation. I don't think being able to electronically download a book over a propriety network using a proprietary device (that someone chose to purchase) is one of those.
- d2zo 15y ago
  If it comes to be that a significant majority of the book market is locked by DRM schemes, then no, Amazon ought not have the right to do as they please, and a regulatory agency should be established to ensure fair and equitable access to the materials. Education, water, electricity, communication, and healthcare are all fine and proper examples of what happens when incumbents reach "escape velocity" and their past innovations turn into today's rent seeking.

nate_meurer 15y ago

Entitlement is indeed a pretty useless concept in this context. Are you "entitled" to lend a paper book to someone. Publisher say no, and they are backed up with the force of law in some countries. Are you "entitled" to read a book out loud? The Authors Guild says no. Are you "entitled" to sing a song out loud? ASCAP says no. Are you "entitled" to sell a CD that you own? Music publishers say no. Eventually I'll might get to something to which you do think you are "entitled", and smart money bets there is someone in the content industry who wants to deprive you of it, and someone in the legislature willing to make you a criminal if you if you try. The slippery slpe has been well documented for a long time. BTW, if you haven't already recognized it, this discussion is about much more than just Amazon's TOS.