You have none of these fears, and none of these issues.
The illegal method is more convenient and has less problems associated with it than the legal method.
The removal of items and features from a device I have purchased should be seen as theft.
Why are consumers being asked to pay money for a right to view an item, rather than to own the item? Why is there any difference in ownership within the digital world (for the same price or more) to the book I hold in my hand?
Why?
Simply because companies have found a way to utilise technology to exploit the consumer and increase their own profits.
Consumers sometimes think, quite wrongly, that if the company were to go out of business they would release a 'key' to unlock all their DRM purchases. If Amazon decides the Kindle is no longer profitable and they shut it down, consumers think that all their books will become unlocked.I think history has shown us that is not true.
There needs to be a strong movement from the community at large against these business practices which are no longer about Intellectual Property,and encouraging innovation and are instead simply about milking the market.
Over the past few weeks I’ve come across a lot of both speculation and information relating to Amazon’s Kindle ebook reader. I’ve heard of kill switches and Amazon’s ability to remotely disable content and even the whole device. Is spending money on a Kindle (and content for the device)just too much of gamble?
The problem I have with the Kindle is that it combines a proprietary device with content that’s shackled with DRM (Digital Right Management). Now throw in the ability for Amazon to be able to access each and every Kindle remotely, snoop through it and disable content that it deems somehow dodgy. I’ve also had first-hand reports from people who have had their Kindles (and Amazon accounts) disabled for odd reasons such as returning too many items. Once a Kindle is disabled all the purchased content is also disabled. That could result in the user being significantly out of pocket.
Poll
Is the Kindle one big DRM timebomb?
But there are even more unknowns. We know that there exists a kill-switch for the text-to-speech feature that allows publishers to disable the feature for specific titles. While this feature protects the publisher’s ability to control how content is distributed, it sucks for people who really wanted this feature. If there’s one kill-switch, it’s likely that Amazon, and publishers, have other kill-switches at their disposal. Personally, I’d be uncomfortable with so many players having the ability to remotely tinker with my Kindle.
What I’d like to see with the Kindle is clarity. Clarity as to what kill-switches exist, who has the ability to activate them, under what circumstances a Kindle can be remotely disabled, and what recourse the customer has to try to set things straight. Amazon (and the publishers for that matter) have no right to enter my home and remove books (or features from products that I have previously purchased) but with devices such as the Kindle companies seem happy to bestow these privileges upon themselves without even having the decency to lay out the terms clearly. When I buy a physical book or CD I’m buying the product as a whole, but when I buy a digital product what I’m buying could be very fluid. Today I might have text-to-speech ability for a book, tomorrow I might not.
Thoughts?
