3 ms·

I'm afraid I don't understand your point. I never said anything about wiping data or canceling a contract because that's totally and completely irrelevant. The

I'm afraid I don't understand your point. I never said anything about wiping data or canceling a contract because that's totally and completely irrelevant. The point is a car title shows proof of ownership. Beyond paying a bill, you don't have that proof of ownership for a cell phone. But even last month's Verizon bill isn't proof to Verizon or Apple that I didn't just sell my iPhone today. You certainly don't have anywhere near that proof of ownership with a Kindle. Amazon isn't doing the easy thing. Amazon is doing the thing that isn't going to make them liable. If they don't hand over personal information, it's going to piss off an internet commenter. If they hand over information (not required by law), they are opening themselves up to liabilities as a result of releasing private information. If law enforcement follows the proper channels, it's a non-issue. If we're arguing that an Amazon rep provided the wrong information to the customer, well, then there's nothing to argue about. I find it mildly humorous that we jump from an individual claiming their Kindle was stolen to the FBI requesting information from Amazon. I'm not arguing what Amazon should or shouldn't do. I'm simply sharing my perspective on why they don't do it for everyone that comes asking.

Lagged2Death 14y ago
I'm afraid I don't understand your point. I never said anything about wiping data or canceling a contract... You said: You don't officially transfer anything when you sell a phone or a Kindle... But that's not really true. That's my point. You would follow some procedures, involving the phone company officials (not government officials) to avoid paying the buyer's phone bills or Kindle bills. In this way, the phone and the Kindle are like a car. The transfer of ownership requires official help because the Kindle, the phone, and the car are in a sense just nodes on a network. Other goods, from pencils to diamond rings, are fundamentally different, and don't require the involvement of officialdom when they change hands. You believe that you can cleave the car example off as a special category of property, different because it's encumbered by government papers. My point is that a lot of electronic gadgetry is already encumbered in the same way. The papers don't have to be government ones. I don't see the problem as one of proof of ownership. Information that could have helped an investigation supposedly existed, was offered, then the offer was rescinded, then the information was "lost." If a police department had behaved this way, the readers of HN would call it corruption.

Lagged2Death 14y ago

I'm afraid I don't understand your point. I never said anything about wiping data or canceling a contract... You said: You don't officially transfer anything when you sell a phone or a Kindle... But that's not really true. That's my point. You would follow some procedures, involving the phone company officials (not government officials) to avoid paying the buyer's phone bills or Kindle bills. In this way, the phone and the Kindle are like a car. The transfer of ownership requires official help because the Kindle, the phone, and the car are in a sense just nodes on a network. Other goods, from pencils to diamond rings, are fundamentally different, and don't require the involvement of officialdom when they change hands. You believe that you can cleave the car example off as a special category of property, different because it's encumbered by government papers. My point is that a lot of electronic gadgetry is already encumbered in the same way. The papers don't have to be government ones. I don't see the problem as one of proof of ownership. Information that could have helped an investigation supposedly existed, was offered, then the offer was rescinded, then the information was "lost." If a police department had behaved this way, the readers of HN would call it corruption.