Open main menu

Comments:Michigan student and California engineer sue Amazon for remote deletion of 'Nineteen Eighty-Four'

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading


Personal connectionEdit

In my AP Language class for summer reading, we had to read 1984. But because all the copies quickly ran out at our public libraries, we (the students) resolved to read the book online here. The funny thing is (if I'm not mistaken, which I very well may be), that website is totally legal, because it is based in Canada, where 1984 is in the public domain. -- Poe Joe (talk) 19:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

yes, 1984 is public domain in canada. By extension, it is public domain pretty much everywhere online in that case.

also, on the topic of amazon: doubleplusungood

Troubling Legal waters aheadEdit

Having these e-books exclusive from a company that sells certain file/book is going be rough in the long haul. I think medium is too new and too murky. With Amazon.com holding the exclusive rights over their e-reader & type of files it uses. They'll be able to do anything they want to do with those devices. By Trapping people in using their devices, I totally believe they will not able completely safeguard their purchases. If say Amazon gets introuble for selling something they were suppose to or something else legally goes wrong. They could just remove them from the e-readers at will.

I think this case and possiblly others to come will come see need for universal files or universal readers. No exclusive E-readers for certain companies. I don't think there are any e-book owerner rights. I hope this case brings positive Change. -- Colt9033 (talk) 15:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

He'll have to read it again!Edit

The horrors! He'll have to read a couple hundred pages over again! Poor thing. 206.74.5.136 (talk) 14:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, people have lives, and it usually takes a day to read a couple hundred pages. 128.211.161.194 (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

DRM IssuesEdit

This is why I don't want to buy an ebook reader yet. I'd like a reader with the following qualities:

- No DRM restrictions. - Doesn't break if I accidentally drop it or it rains a little bit. - Decent price.

128.211.161.194 (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

PreposterousEdit

That book was never on his Kindle to begin with. We have always been at war with Eurasia. —24.63.7.183 (talk) 05:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)