Amazon goes Big Brother on Kindle’s “1984″
In an ironically Orwellian move, on July 17, 2009 Amazon.com remotely deleted illegally-sold copies of George Orwell's "1984" and "Animal Farm" from its customer's Kindle e-book readers.
This issue is unique to electronic goods, so it's important to parse the words carefully. The books were indeed sold illegally through, and by, Amazon.com. The legitimacy of the purchases, however, does not seem to be in question. The Kindle owners made a legal purchase, of an item that was not legal for Amazon.com to sell in the United States.
The electronic books that Amazon sold are in the public domain in Canada and Australia, but not in the United States. Effectively, works in the public domain belong to the public. What can be confusing, however, is that something in the public domain--or free to use-- in one country, may not be public domain in another. Naturally, an Amazon.com purchaser might simply assume--considering that Amazon requires their billing address to make a purchase--that the item they were purchasing was neither free, nor illegal to purchase
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13512_3-10290133-23.html
Similar Blog & News Articles
- Digging Deeper Into Amazon's Orwellian Moment :: Medialoper
- Amazon apologizes for Orwell Kindle mishap but was it too late? :: Web Ink Now
- Some E-Books Are More Equal Than Others :: Pogue's Posts
- Student Sues Amazon For Deleting His Homework :: Bloggers Blog: Blogging the Blogsphere
- Amazon Removes Books from Kindle, Exposing the True Concern: They're Watching, They're in Control :: michaelzimmer.org
- Amazon Removes Orwell Books From Kindles :: Gizmos, Gadgets, Technology and more
Similar Wikipedia Articles
FCC Says: Wireless Surf = Warrantless Search
“Anything using RF energy — we have the right to inspect it to make sure it is not causing interference,” says FCC spokesman David Fiske.
According to Wired:
The FCC claims it derives its warrantless search power from the Communications Act of 1934, though the constitutionality of the claim has gone untested in the courts. That’s largely because the FCC had little to do with average citizens for most of the last 75 years, when home transmitters were largely reserved to ham-radio operators and CB-radio aficionados. But in 2009, nearly every household in the United States has multiple devices that use radio waves and fall under the FCC’s purview, making the commission’s claimed authority ripe for a court challenge.
Life Ain’t Fair — Or Is It?
Wired
Judge: Copyright Owners Must Consider 'Fair Use' Before Sending Takedown Notice
"A federal judge rules that copyright owners must first consider "fair use" before sending takedown notices to online video-sharing sites like YouTube requiring removal of clips. Universal Music argued it could send a takedown notice even if a posting qualified as a fair use of a copyright."
...........................................................
http://feeds.wired.com/~r/wired/topheadlines/~3/370400972/judge-copyright.html




