In another demonstration of, well, how exercise of copyright control really looks like censorship.
Will they reimburse customers who bought the ebook version, or will they simply say that they have never been charged. You know, the way we’ve been always at war with Eastasia and stimulus is stabilization.
Anyways. I guess I am not buying Kindle until they work out these legal issues. For now, I’ll just … enjoy the irony of Kindle ad on the Slashdot story.
On Techdirt:
Greg Beck writes in to let us know that the law firm that was recently challenged for claiming that it was a copyright violation to post its cease-and-desist letter also has some other interesting ideas about copyright, including banning people from looking at the firm’s source code.
In other news, publishers use copyright claim to say you can’t read the book you just bought.
Jest aside, that actually did happen with one of the older books in the Harry Potter series. Some copies were sold before release date, and somehow they got a court injunction saying that the people in possession of those copies couldn’t read them (not just talking about it or leaking plots, but EVEN FROM READING). I can honestly say that I am glad that I never contributed a single dime to that whole series.
When are these money-grubbing trolls going to learn that you can’t use copyright claims to restrict fair use? And, of course, everyone knows that EULA-style contracts are even more “barely” legal than 18-year-old strippers and probably won’t stand to a court challenge in the U.S.