Amazon’s recent remote deletion of the e-books “1984″ and “Animal Farm” (of all things) from peoples’ Kindles, and Jeff Bezo’s apology, really has shoved the DRM vs. First Sale Right issue to center stage. And it’s about time.
As brief background, there’s a (rather weak) article in the New York Times.
But a much better analysis can be found in a public radio commentary by Farhad Manjoo. An excerpt from the transcript (available here):
So far, Amazon has only deleted books that were already
available in print. But in our paperless future — when all
books exist as files on servers — courts would have the power
to make works vanish completely. With a simple ruling over a
copyright dispute or a claim of libel, judges could
simultaneously block the sale of new books and pull all
current copies out of circulation.“The power to delete your books, movies and music remotely is
a power no one should have. Here’s one way around this: Don’t
buy a Kindle until Amazon updates its terms of service to
prohibit remote deletions. Even better, the company ought to
remove the technical capability to do so, making such a mass
evisceration impossible in the event that a government compels
it.”
He goes on to suggest that we need new laws to control “tethered access” on content we pay for but don’t own in the cloud.
Simply upholding the existing First Sale right — and not allowing companies to “license” it away — might be enough.
Update: Amazon lost the lawsuit brought by a student over disappearance of “1984″ and his homework. Article here.
