Amazon blacklists customer, deletes all her Kindle content and won't tell her why

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

http://www.bekkelund.net/2012/10/22/...by-amazon-drm/

Amazon has somehow determined that the banned account is connected with another banned account and so they closed it and deleted all the books that had been downloaded to the user's kindle.

While is in line with official Amazon policy that if your account is banned for a TOS violation, any other accounts you create will also be banned.

The problem: The person in question only had ONE Amazon account and only ever had ONE Amazon account.

She emailed Amazon several times for help clearing things up and, you know, getting back all those ebooks she PAID for, but Amazon basically told her to pound sand.

More specifically they told her they can't tell her why her account was connected to another one that was banned, they cannot restore her account in any way and they will offer her no compensation for the deleted content.

And, the icing on the cake: At the end of the last email, Amazon wishes her luck in finding another retailer she can do business with.

----------------

It's stuff like this that makes me leery of going entirely digital. This is like a company deciding you've somehow done them wrong, then sending some tough guys to your house to take back EVERYTHING you've purchased from them as a penalty. It's theft. 100% legal theft.

Of course, they can get away with it because you're not actually buying a movie or a book or a game, you're just buying a license to have access to that content for a fixed amount of time.

Another thing I dislike about the digital shift is that return policies are going the way of the dinosaur as a result. Many content providers do not offer any refund on downloaded software or content.

A couple of years ago I downloaded a program that did not work properly despite my efforts with the company's tech support. They 100% refused to refund a penny to me. I will never do business with them again.

Let's also not forget that you can't resell (or in a lot of cases loan) digital content either.

I feel digital content just puts too much power in the hands of the company providing it and can really screw customers needlessly, such as the person discussed above.

[crashhelmet]

This is why I don't use iTunes. I've watched people fight tooth and nail trying to play their purchased MP3s on other devices or, in some cases, other media players on the same computer.

I've run into similar issues with the "Free Digital Copy" of movies that are sold with some DVDs and BluRays. You have to download a special app to download and monitors/controls your DRM. I can't watch them without an active internet connection for it to verify itself.

[Greenday]

When I download stuff on iTunes, I burn them onto CDs so I always have a hard copy. I never have trouble playing it on VLC media player.

This is a pretty blatant case of abuse of rights. It makes me glad I didn't get a Kindle. Companies who refuse to work with customers are worthless and I promptly refuse to use their services.

[insertNameHere]

This comic says it all. You pay money to be legal and in the end you get fucked over for no reason but the wonderfulness of the contracts they make you agree to waives any right. Actually, I caught something in the new xbox live terms that now states I agree to not take part in any class action lawsuit against them.... fucking serious? So, I do feel really bad for the person in the OP but I guess that is what happens when you invest in a proprietary technology. I REALLY hate that remote kill switches such as what was used are in anyway LEGAL. I had often heard it was an extreme countermeasure that wouldn't be misused, glad I never believed that.

What is next, I buy a Dell Pc (ok really reaching since htat not going to happen) Now they piss me off I go to dellsucks.com and then dell decides because I just went to dellsucks which is against terms of use they get to delete all the software I have paid for and been using becasue well they like to make shit up. Personally I think once the file is downloaded and I am authorized to use it they shouldn't be able to stop my use unless it was say a rental which even then is reaching because they will use a loophole of offfer a 10yr rental of the book.

[gremcint]

Thus why I don't buy a kindle, ever.

[BlaqueKatt]

The problem: The person in question only had ONE Amazon account and only ever had ONE Amazon account.

She does say she uses "amazon.com" and not amazon.UK for her kindle purchases, which would involve two separate accounts, and a .com account would require a north american address.

I use amazon.com and not co.uk for my Kindle

and using the .com and not .UK
from .UK T&C

All prices are inclusive of legally applicable VAT.

and looking up several books I have on my kindle, on the .UK site, they are NOT APPROVED BY THE PUBLISHER for kindle sale in the UK(and due to some licensing agreements a book can have different publishers in different countries).

So violating international copyright law as well as avoiding taxes, and using fraudulent information to do such.

Amazing how everyone jumps on the "big bad corporation", without looking at the obvious.

[Aethian]

I hate to say it but it sounds like she not only broke TOS for TWO aspects of Amazon but that she also broke international copyright law. So...just getting her stuff deleted is a slap on a wrist to what could have happened.

[Greenday]

She does say she uses "amazon.com" and not amazon.UK for her kindle purchases, which would involve two separate accounts, and a .com account would require a north american address.



and using the .com and not .UK
from .UK T&C


and looking up several books I have on my kindle, on the .UK site, they are NOT APPROVED BY THE PUBLISHER for kindle sale in the UK(and due to some licensing agreements a book can have different publishers in different countries).

So violating international copyright law as well as avoiding taxes, and using fraudulent information to do such.

Amazing how everyone jumps on the "big bad corporation", without looking at the obvious.

I'm confused. Why does she have to use .uk instead of .com? It's not like she lives in the UK.

[BlaqueKatt]

I'm confused. Why does she have to use .uk instead of .com? It's not like she lives in the UK.

.uk covers The EU, .com covers north america, according to the article, she lives in norway.

and the writer of the blog didn't do their due dillagence either and is trying to make amazon look bad

Linn lives in Norway, far away from Amazon’s jurisdiction. How will she ever find the means to get her books back? By suing a large corporation half-way round the earth?

from the T&C

These conditions are governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, and the application of the United Nations Convention of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly excluded. We both agree to submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the district o

f Luxembourg City, which means that you may bring a claim to enforce your consumer protection rights in connection with these Conditions of Use in Luxembourg or in the EU country in which you live.

so yeah lots of "poor little person being tromped on by a huge company" *sniffle*

[lordlundar]

.uk covers The EU, .com covers north america, according to the article, she lives in norway.

Actually .com covers the US. Canada has to use the .ca suffix. (and yes, the two sites are different.)

[Nekojin]

Actually, I caught something in the new xbox live terms that now states I agree to not take part in any class action lawsuit against them.... fucking serious?

Probably not legally enforceable (at least, in the US). That's a huge surrendering of legal power, and they're not giving you anything back in exchange for giving up those rights.

Just because it's in a EULA, that doesn't automagically make it valid.

[HYHYBT]

Amazing how everyone jumps on the "big bad corporation", without looking at the obvious.

In this case, it's at least 2/3 Amazon's fault for people making that jump. They refused to give any answer, rather than explaining about not being allowed to use .com in the UK.

Meanwhile, I have a CD that I bought from the UK Amazon because it wasn't available in the US. They didn't seem to have any problem with it, and just added the appropriate shipping to get it across the ocean. Amazing that digital copies can be so much more trouble than physical ones.

[gremcint]

actually I shop on both .ca and .com and never had any trouble, a lot of stuff is like have the price on .com.

[Amanita]

In my case, I am canadian, but often use amazon.com because what I want isn't available, or costs a lot more than on .ca.

[Mr Hero]

Actually .com covers the US. Canada has to use the .ca suffix. (and yes, the two sites are different.)

Amazon.ca? What's the website for that?

I didn't know Canada used .ca until that scene in Scott Pilgrim.