Do we own our books?
This is very disturbing for Kindle owners, or for owners of any electronic resources:
Amazon Removes E-Books From Kindle Store, Revokes Ownership
I wonder if Logos could ever suffer the same problems as Amazon?
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
Comments
-
Disturbing indeed. I doubt I buy a Kindle after all. [:(]
Just think what would happen if the Lockman Foundation or Zondervan decided to pull their licensing. (Research WHY the electronic versions of the Japanese Bible disappeared from the internet.) [N]
What if the German Bible Society or United Bible Society decided they own the copyrights to every Greek MS they have ever copied? Oh wait, did I hear something like that is happenning? [N] [N]
Although it is probably a sin to try and stop God's word from being read by the masses, history shows not even governments and organized religion can stop it. It just makes the price of reading it go from FREE to LICENSE FEE to one's own LIFE. [N] [N] [N]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Paul Golder said:
This is very disturbing for Kindle owners, or for owners of any electronic resources:
Amazon Removes E-Books From Kindle Store, Revokes Ownership
I wonder if Logos could ever suffer the same problems as Amazon?I just went to the Amazon Kindle site and sent them an e-mail stating that in view of recent developments I was no longer interested in the Kindle, and that if they wish to recover my interest it will be necessary for them to prominently post on their Kindle page that they will never again do that.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Several years ago, I bought the entire Old Testament and New Testament versions of the Interpretation Series (a WJK resource). I also bought a copy of the OT and NT versions of the Daily Study Bible Series (sometimes called "Barclay's Commentary)." Each of the resources were in the Libronix format and have resided on my computer(s) for quite some time. However, a few years back, WKJ decided to terminate their license with Logos and move to publishing the resources in another digital format.
As an aside, I really regret that I didn't buy up about 10 copies of the Interpretation Series to give as gifts to folks who would later purchase the Libronix DLS and want to have those resources on their machine.
Nevertheless, the license agreements for those former Logos resources must have been written in such a way that even when WJK moved away from Logos, we were not deprived of the resources we already owned.
Similarly, I own a copy of the 1977 version of the NASB. It's still in an 2 file, LSF and LIX, file format, and not likely to ever be updated to a single lbxlls file. However, I can still access it and use it, even though even Lockman no longer offers that version.
I can't (and won't) say that something akin to the Amazon debacle could/will never happen within the Logos community. But, based on the past experiences with these products, where a publisher pulled the Logos license, or no longer supports, updates, or even continue to offer a particular resource -- I would like to think that we are at least a little protected in our investment (which is a blessing in itself).
Dale
Blessings,
Dale Durnell
Coming to you from Henryetta Oklahoma (45 miles south of Tulsa, and 85 miles east of OKC)
0 -
In my experience, it does not work this way.
There have been several titles over the years that Logos lost rights to publish, but existing users did not loose the rights to keep their purchase.
I think at least one title by Packer went through this and countless others from third party publishers like E4.0 -
And if memory serves, there was one title Logos had been told they would loose the license to. They were still able to sell the book for a week or two until the deadline of when their license to the book ran out. So it seems the Logos system is much different than Kindle.0
-
George Somsel said:
it will be necessary for them to prominently post on their Kindle page that they will never again do that.
Quote from Amazon:
“We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances,”
I wonder under what circumstances they would still remove books from customer's devices?
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Joe Miller said:
And if memory serves, there was one title Logos had been told they would loose the license to. They were still able to sell the book for a week or two until the deadline of when their license to the book ran out. So it seems the Logos system is much different than Kindle.
My concern is what happens if Logos moves to the "cloud" environment, and then the resources are no longer on our computers...
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Paul Golder said:
My concern is what happens if Logos moves to the "cloud" environment, and then the resources are no longer on our computers...
...and they lose the license?
As long as the possibility is upfront and a known part of the purchase - I suppose it would be fair. But if it done after the fact (as in the Kindle case), I would be quite irritated. Did Kindle make it clear what a license to their books meant? What did Kindle users agree to when the made their purchase?
Blessings,
Floyd
Blessings,
FloydPastor-Patrick.blogspot.com
0 -
Floyd Johnson said:
...and they lose the license?
As long as the possibility is upfront and a known part of the purchase - I suppose it would be fair.
As I understand Logos' "cloud" plans ownership is not involved as we would only pay to access a certain library of resources. If that resource is removed for whatever reason then one might expect a substitute resource or a reduced payment.
We still own and use the resources on our hard drive - the cloud environment permits use of resources we could not afford or did not want to purchase.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Paul Golder said:George Somsel said:
it will be necessary for them to prominently post on their Kindle page that they will never again do that.
Quote from Amazon:
“We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances,”
I wonder under what circumstances they would still remove books from customer's devices?
It also is not sufficient in that I said it needed to be prominently posted on their Kindle page. I want everyone to see it.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
I just went to the Amazon Kindle site and sent them an e-mail stating that in view of recent developments I was no longer interested in the Kindle, and that if they wish to recover my interest it will be necessary for them to prominently post on their Kindle page that they will never again do that.
I have a follow-up already. I received an e-mail from Amazon.
Hello from Amazon.com.
Thanks for writing to us with your concern.
Please note that, these were some books which were added to our catalog using our self-service platform by a third-party who did not have the rights to the books. When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from devices, and issued a full refund to customers account.
We are working with the authorized rights holder to make the titles available in our store very soon. We apologize for the inconvenience.From this it would appear that the ultimate culprit in this affair is the one who added the books when they had no rights to the titles. Under the circumstances I can understand Amazon's actions since they were a party to selling items which were not authorized by the copyright holder. This is an entirely different spin from what other columns have presented.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Dave Hooton said:Floyd Johnson said:
...and they lose the license?
As long as the possibility is upfront and a known part of the purchase - I suppose it would be fair.
As I understand Logos' "cloud" plans ownership is not involved as we would only pay to access a certain library of resources. If that resource is removed for whatever reason then one might expect a substitute resource or a reduced payment.
We still own and use the resources on our hard drive - the cloud environment permits use of resources we could not afford or did not want to purchase.
...if that is the case. Do we know it? Can we expect this will be the new Logos system? Allowing us to buy the books to our harddisks and also for some less needed or more expensive titles to use a "cloud" version alternatively? I would like that system, but I would hesitate to invest into just pure "cloud" subscription type of Logos. We discussed that already.
Bohuslav
0 -
George Somsel said:
it will be necessary for them to prominently post on their Kindle page that they will never again do that.
People do not seem to understand licensing agreements. Get mad at the book publishing company, not at Amazon. Amazon did what they were required by the publisher to do. The publisher made them pull it off. I am pretty sure Amazon was unhappy about having to do so.
0 -
George Somsel said:
From this it would appear that the ultimate culprit in this affair is the one who added the books when they had no rights to the titles. Under the circumstances I can understand Amazon's actions since they were a party to selling items which were not authorized by the copyright holder. This is an entirely different spin from what other columns have presented.
My biggest problem is that, without directly saying it, all of Amazon's statements imply that they continue to reserve the right to delete resources from users machines.
And from what I read, this is not implicitly stated in the end user license agreement. When all is said and done, the end result will most likely be case-law that will effect all owners of electronic resources.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Just think what would happen if the Lockman Foundation or Zondervan decided to pull their licensing
The problem was not a "pulled license" but that the company providing the book did not have the rights to it i.e. it was a failure on the part of the lawyers to spot the problem. Amazon has admitted that it handled the problem poorly and will not repeat THAT solution in the future. As our world becomes more global copyrights become a far more complex issue as the laws are not uniform. How to "correct" copyright infringements is, for these electronic forms, new territory. So, yes, Amazon blew it ... but its no big deal as a one time blunder.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Rev Dale L Durnell OSL said:
I also bought a copy of the OT and NT versions of the Daily Study Bible Series (sometimes called "Barclay's Commentary)." Each of the resources were in the Libronix format and have resided on my computer(s) for quite some time.
I also enjoy continued use of Barclay's Daily Study Bible in Logos.
I may be mistaken but I think the older stuff falls under the "first sale doctrine." Recent case law, established in Timothy S. Vernor v. Autodesk Inc., extended that doctrine to software. "The first sale doctrine permits a person who owns a lawfully-made copy of a copyrighted work to sell or otherwise dispose of the copy." The key question is who OWNS it? For a few years now, many EULA specifically state the buyer does not own the software.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
George Somsel said:George Somsel said:
I just went to the Amazon Kindle site and sent them an e-mail stating that in view of recent developments I was no longer interested in the Kindle, and that if they wish to recover my interest it will be necessary for them to prominently post on their Kindle page that they will never again do that.
I have a follow-up already. I received an e-mail from Amazon.
Hello from Amazon.com.
Thanks for writing to us with your concern.
Please note that, these were some books which were added to our catalog using our self-service platform by a third-party who did not have the rights to the books. When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from devices, and issued a full refund to customers account.
We are working with the authorized rights holder to make the titles available in our store very soon. We apologize for the inconvenience.From this it would appear that the ultimate culprit in this affair is the one who added the books when they had no rights to the titles. Under the circumstances I can understand Amazon's actions since they were a party to selling items which were not authorized by the copyright holder. This is an entirely different spin from what other columns have presented.
Amazon HAD to state these two points to avoid liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. If their claim is true it makes you wonder how many more illegal titles their careless system has sold? At what point does negligence become liability?
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Amazon has admitted that it handled the problem poorly and will not repeat THAT solution in the future
Amazon overstepped their authority.
Quote from Amazon: “We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances,”
Amazon's answer is a double whammy for their legal department. First, as George questions, there appears to be a scenario they feel does merit this action. Second, this statement is an admission this particular scenario did not merit the action.
If Nike shoe company found out UPS had delivered counterfeit shoes to a retailer, they get a court order (cease & desist) and a warrant (for seizure.) UPS doesn't kick down the door and remove the contraband.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
The key question is who OWNS it? For a few years now, many EULA specifically state the buyer does not own the software.
I am reminded of the saying: "If you think you own your home, try not paying your property tax..."
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
How to "correct" copyright infringements is, for these electronic forms, new territory. So, yes, Amazon blew it ... but its no big deal as a one time blunder.
Right now Google (parent of Youtube) is facing a $1 Billion lawsuit from Viacom for basically the exact same scenario - a 3rd party user uploads copyrighted material using the provided self-service system.
Really It all depends on where the courts define Amazon's system's boundaries. Does the fact each Kindle have an unique ID that Amazon uses for delivery of data constitute the Kindle as being part of Amazon's network? If that is determined to be the case then Amazon had to remove the books - per the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
If Amazon's system is only defined as property in it's physical possession then it had to remove the ability to download the books but NOT to delete them from other's private Kindles - per the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act § 512(m) Protection of Privacy ".....OSP’s are not required to remove or disable access to material if doing so would break another law."
In other words: If your kid's puppy gets stolen and you know who has the pup, you better not get caught inside their house trying to retreive the pup.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
In other words: If your kid's puppy gets stolen and you know who has the pup, you better not get caught inside their house trying to retreive the pup.
Sort of like a print publisher not being able to come into your home and take back a book...
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Paul Golder said:Matthew C Jones said:
In other words: If your kid's puppy gets stolen and you know who has the pup, you better not get caught inside their house trying to retreive the pup.
Sort of like a print publisher not being able to come into your home and take back a book...
To be more accurate it is more like you sold a stolen pup and break into the buyer's house to retrieve the pup while leaving the money on the kitchen counter. You still better not get caught doing it!
(In Oklahoma we have the "Make My Day Law" ala Clint Eastwood in the Dirty Harry movies. You don't get caught here, you get shot.)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
To be more accurate it is more like you sold a stolen pup and break into the buyer's house to retrieve the pup while leaving the money on the kitchen counter. You still better not get caught doing it!
(In Oklahoma we have the "Make My Day Law" ala Clint Eastwood in the Dirty Harry movies. You don't get caught here, you get shot.)
You've got me thinking. If a user has a Kindle in their house, under lock and key, and amazon wirelessly removed their resource, without their consent, could not this be inferred as breaking a privacy/property law? I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that at least one attorney, if not the entire ACLU, is going to jump on it...
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Paul Golder said:Matthew C Jones said:
To be more accurate it is more like you sold a stolen pup and break into the buyer's house to retrieve the pup while leaving the money on the kitchen counter. You still better not get caught doing it!
(In Oklahoma we have the "Make My Day Law" ala Clint Eastwood in the Dirty Harry movies. You don't get caught here, you get shot.)
You've got me thinking. If a user has a Kindle in their house, under lock and key, and amazon wirelessly removed their resource, without their consent, could not this be inferred as breaking a privacy/property law? I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that at least one attorney, if not the entire ACLU, is going to jump on it...
That's what I mean- - per the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act § 512(m) Protection of Privacy ".....OSP’s are not required to remove or disable access to material if doing so would break another law." I expect there will be a lawsuit over this Amazon thing. - (Privacy issues and non-compliance with the DMCA notification requirement.)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
-
Logos will say we own them I look at it more like a long term lease.
Brian Whalen
http://www.mcnazarene.com
0 -
I alsohave heard of this happening with a physical book set, a Christian encyclopedia set from a few years ago. It was deemed too Christian, publishing stoipped, and all sets were recalled and destroyed. I believe they were early in the process, so it wan't too difficult a process.
Brian Whalen
http://www.mcnazarene.com
0
