# "buyer's" remorse



## JOkindle (Feb 17, 2009)

I'll start this topic out using a quote from another kindle owner:

_*"I didn't buy books, I bought the right of rental-vision or the right to read the book, on their device."*_

what this boils down to is when we "purchase" a book, or other kindle download, it's not transferable in any way. That implies we don't actually "own" what was purchased. If we own something we have full options of what to do w/ that item. Having something stored in our personal "library" at amazon doesn't allow us personal freedom regarding how that item is used in the future.

I've been a major book sharer all my life & enjoy handing a book to someone when I think they'd really like it. Thru the years, too, we've pulled old books off the shelf for one of the kids, either thinking they'd enjoy the subject or it would work for a class assignment. Having control over such "transfers" has always been taken for granted as part of ownership.

I have a kindle, given to me as a gift. Before today I thought if I read a book I really like & want to have on hand to share I'd just purchase a "regular" copy. However, we really shouldn't have to only have that opiton. Amazon should acknowledge up-front that customers are RENTING, or design a way to allow PURCHASERS/OWNERS of the material to do whatever they want w/ THE PURCHASES. There could be a "rental" option or "purchase" (ie: download to personal computer in similar fashion as audible.com). Rentals could be "turned in" for a partial refund or credit, or applied to full purchase of the same item. Maybe if people begin contacting Amazon about this issue, they'll be forced to say you're renting or make it transferable.


----------



## Finished (Feb 14, 2009)

I understand the whole DRM debate, but here's the thing:

You are the owner of your Kindle book, but only one copy. Just like a print book. You can download it to your computer and put it on any Kindle you want. It is true you can't use it on a non-Kindle device, but you made the choice to buy an electronic book with a proprietary format. That is a different issue than whether you own the copy or not.

These "you are only renting" arguments that keep cropping up on Kindle forums just aren't true. There are other, very valid objections to DRM, but that's not one of them.


----------



## stargazer0725 (Feb 10, 2009)

I actually agree with this point.  I understand that they want to prevent unauthorized copying of the digital content, but I think there is an easy work-around:

Amazon needs to add a feature to both the Kindle Store and the Kindles themselves, allowing consumers to send their digital purchases to other Kindle owners.  Once they are sent to the next Kindle owner, the content is then deregistered from the initial purchaser's library (either deleted entirely, or even better still listed in your library, but locked and marked with a "Loaned to Jane Doe's Kindle").

It would be just like loaning out a book...you wouldn't have the rights to read the material until the borrower sent it back to you.

And frankly, this scenario would not be any sort of a stretch for Amazon.  They are already authorizing and tracking DRM rights per Amazon account.  Wouldn't take much to transfer between accounts as well.


----------



## Boston (Nov 7, 2008)

DRM is digital rights management - a topic which is not just specific to eBooks,  but other media as well including music and movies.


----------



## Kathy (Nov 5, 2008)

Just Wondering said:


> I understand the whole DRM debate, but here's the thing:
> 
> You are the owner of your Kindle book, but only one copy. Just like a print book. You can download it to your computer and put it on any Kindle you want. It is true you can't use it on a non-Kindle device, but you made the choice to buy an electronic book with a proprietary format. That is a different issue than whether you own the copy or not.
> 
> These "you are only renting" arguments that keep cropping up on Kindle forums just aren't true. There are other, very valid objections to DRM, but that's not one of them.


Actually, you can't put a drm book on another Kindle. It is registered to the serial number of your own Kindle and will not open on another Kindle unless the Kindles are on the same account.


----------



## Mikuto (Oct 30, 2008)

DRM = Digital Rights Management, or copy protection, if you prefer. 

A lot of people argue that the Kindle is the wrong device because you can only buy books that have DRM, and "information wants to be free" therefore you shouldn't buy anything that has DRM. What these people are overlooking is the fact that you can fill up your Kindle with millions of free books from the Internet without ever using amazon.com's purchasing service. You can read these books wherever you want. Not just on the Kindle.

I think people look at ownership in the wrong eye when it comes to debates about copy protection. Authors and publishers are trying to protect their intellectual property, just like musicians were when they agreed to sell music over iTunes (which recently dropped the DRM, but used to have a stringent copy protection on their songs). If you sell something without copy protection you may as well be giving it away for free, because all it takes is one person to buy that item and put it up for download on the internet. "Sharing" in the language of the Internet is often a euphemism for piracy, where in one person buys something, and "shares" it with millions of his closest friends.  

Understandable if you're not part of the "DRM is evil because it stops me from pirating things" crowd, but you see a lot of that on the internet, and I think that's what Benjamin was reacting to. 

You can also trade Kindle books between family members so long as they all have a Kindle registered to your account. I suspect that this will change in the future, since non-DRM files are becoming more and more popular, but for now, Amazon.com is doing everything they can to convince the authors and publishers that there's some protection for their product, and buying from Amazon.com won't just make it easier for people to pirate their books.


----------



## Finished (Feb 14, 2009)

Kathy,

You are right, I knew that but wasn't thinking. I am so used to using DRM music and just registering another device to download to a different device. I know with Kindle it is more awkward. Perhaps they could allow multiple registrations just for the purpose of transferring, but not buying. That is certainly technologically possible


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

Kathy said:


> Actually, you can't put a drm book on another Kindle. It is registered to the serial number of your own Kindle and will not open on another Kindle unless the Kindles are on the same account.


That is not true. Many people have reported that they have been able to register a friends Kindle on their account, load books onto the new Kindle, deregister the Kindle, and the books have stayed on the Kindle. When the book is deleted, the person is not able to re-upload the book because it is not in their account.

Additionally, you can register multiple Kindles to an account with 6 people being able to have the same book on their Kindle at the same time. So the books are not specific to a Kindle but to a Kindle account.

JOkindle: If you wish to share books you can, you have to register that persons Kindle to your account, add the book, and then deregister their Kindle.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

JOkindle said:


> what this boils down to is when we "purchase" a book, or other kindle download, it's not transferable in any way. That implies we don't actually "own" what was purchased. If we own something we have full options of what to do w/ that item. Having something stored in our personal "library" at amazon doesn't allow us personal freedom regarding how that item is used in the future.


I think what you are describing is indeed one of the drawbacks of book-readers, and DRM'd (or rights-protected) content like Kindle Store books.

DRM has its place, I think, although it's interesting how the music world is moving away from DRM after much turmoil and clumsy attempts to implement it.

There seems to be a progression, or maybe a maturity curve, that occurs with this type of technology problem:

1 - First, there is resistance from the creators and publishers to have their content available in digital form. 
2 - Then, there is acceptance, but a tendency to apply heavy DRM controls to avoid widespread pirating of the content. 
3 - As the technology matures, it becomes easy and preferable for most people to purchase the content as opposed to pirating it. At that point, DRM becomes more of a nuisance than a help, and the content becomes available DRM-free.

That is what is happening now with music tracks, and I think it's only a matter of time before we see that happening with videos/movies, and eventually with digitized books as well.


----------



## Mikuto (Oct 30, 2008)

Additionally, sharing is far more complicated with a digital copy of anything than it is with a physical copy. 

Here's a scenario: 

You read a book, you like it, so you let a friend have the book to read it. There is still only ever one copy of the book in the equation. 

Change that book into a digital e-book and you run into a problem. You cannot "share" a digital copy of anything without making a copy of it, therefore breaking copyright law. To share an ebook with someone you either give them a copy of it on a disc or flash drive or e-mail it to them, but you retain the original copy. Now your friend has a free copy of the book which he/she has no reason to delete when he/she is done reading it. 

Do you see the problem?


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

stargazer0725 said:


> I actually agree with this point. I understand that they want to prevent unauthorized copying of the digital content, but I think there is an easy work-around:
> 
> Amazon needs to add a feature to both the Kindle Store and the Kindles themselves, allowing consumers to send their digital purchases to other Kindle owners. Once they are sent to the next Kindle owner, the content is then deregistered from the initial purchaser's library (either deleted entirely, or even better still listed in your library, but locked and marked with a "Loaned to Jane Doe's Kindle").
> 
> ...


This is actually a pretty good idea and seems implementable. It models nicely the 'real-world' handling of a purchased book.


----------



## stargazer0725 (Feb 10, 2009)

ProfCrash said:


> JOkindle: If you wish to share books you can, you have to register that persons Kindle to your account, add the book, and then deregister their Kindle.


I agree that it is "possible" to share books in this manner, but it is probably a technical violation of the DRM agreement (at least a definite grey).

Allowing Kindle owners to transfer their DRM rights to another Kindle owner is a valid way of operating within the DRM agreement - no more than one person can read the content at any given time.

But I'm sure that Amazon would not be interested in doing this. They want to sell books to people. Why allow people to sell their book rights to someone else, when they can sell a brand spanking new "book" themselves.


----------



## LDB (Oct 28, 2008)

stargazer0725 said:


> Amazon needs to add a feature to both the Kindle Store and the Kindles themselves, allowing consumers to send their digital purchases to other Kindle owners. Once they are sent to the next Kindle owner, the content is then deregistered from the initial purchaser's library (either deleted entirely, or even better still listed in your library, but locked and marked with a "Loaned to Jane Doe's Kindle").
> 
> It would be just like loaning out a book...you wouldn't have the rights to read the material until the borrower sent it back to you.


Exactly correct. This is how it _should_ be done. Our Kindle "books" should be no different than our paper books.


----------



## stargazer0725 (Feb 10, 2009)

Harvey said:


> This is actually a pretty good idea and seems implementable. It models nicely the 'real-world' handling of a purchased book.


Got any pull at Amazon, Harvey? I'd even let you take the credit for this one!!!


----------



## JOkindle (Feb 17, 2009)

thanks to all for explanations & information...

when I used the word "transfer", that's exactly what I meant, not intending to imply copy. And I now understand how the word "share" is misunderstood.

stargazer's description re: transferring, which allows amazon to retain control makes a lot of sense, to me.

I use audible.com for kindle downloads. could someone explain the difference re: copy protection/the acceptance of how they provide material?


----------



## Finished (Feb 14, 2009)

Harvey,

You have described the behavioral change that is the primary reason DRM is being removed from music. As more people became comfortable with buying non-physical media, and they got used to the prices (which have decreased), behavior changed. The original Napster and other pirate sites thrived because a large number of people have a certain amount of larceny in their hearts ("stick it to the man"). But convenience and lower prices eventually won out and people accepted the fact that there is a value proposition in buying the products. The same thing will happen to books. Print book prices will continue to increase (it is a relatively low margin business and the costs of paper, printing, transportation, etc. will go up), and electronic media will continue to decrease in price. At some point the price gap will reach a critical point where people with view the electronic version as having sufficient value that they will not bother to spend too much time trying to cheat the system.

I should also note that the rush to DRM by music publishers was in response to massive illegal copying through file sharing. I suspect it won't be long before book publishers realize that the nature of the book product is such that there is unlikely to be widespread file sharing problems.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

stargazer0725 said:


> I agree that it is "possible" to share books in this manner, but it is probably a technical violation of the DRM agreement (at least a definite grey).
> 
> Allowing Kindle owners to transfer their DRM rights to another Kindle owner is a valid way of operating within the DRM agreement - no more than one person can read the content at any given time.
> 
> But I'm sure that Amazon would not be interested in doing this. They want to sell books to people. Why allow people to sell their book rights to someone else, when they can sell a brand spanking new "book" themselves.


But that is not the case. Six people can read a book at the same time. They just have to be registered to your account to do so.


----------



## stargazer0725 (Feb 10, 2009)

ProfCrash said:


> But that is not the case. Six people can read a book at the same time. They just have to be registered to your account to do so.


I understand that 6 people on the same Amazon account can read the same book.

But you specifically mentioned registering and then deregistering the Kindle from the account, once the download is accomplished. In this fashion, a person could register and deregister 50 Kindles and transfer the same books to all 50 Kindles. This totally circumvents the intent of the DRM agreement.

My point is why does Amazon force people to operate in this grey area, when there is a very viable way to legally manage DRM rights built right into their system. All it would take is a simple software upgrade.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

stargazer0725 said:


> I understand that 6 people on the same Amazon account can read the same book.
> 
> But you specifically mentioned registering and then deregistering the Kindle from the account, once the download is accomplished. In this fashion, a person could register and deregister 50 Kindles and transfer the same books to all 50 Kindles. This totally circumvents the intent of the DRM agreement.
> 
> My point is why does Amazon force people to operate in this grey area, when there is a very viable way to legally manage DRM rights built right into their system. All it would take is a simple software upgrade.


Agreed. I thought you said that one person could be reading the book at a time when it is one account as access to the book.

The registering/deregistering thing is a grey area. If I bought a physical book I could share it and no one would say it was a grey area. I owned the book so I can do what I want with the book. But now that I own an electronic copy of a book, I am restricted with how I use it. I do have a problem with that. I don't want to place books n a website that anyone can download. I want to be able to share a book with my SIL and my Brother. That shouldn't be so hard to do.

If I was able to send the copy to someone and then they could share it, I would see the problem. Being able to share it with family and friends should not be a problem.


----------



## stargazer0725 (Feb 10, 2009)

And frankly, now that I think about it, this might be a better deal for Amazon.

Think of it this way....

You download a book to your Amazon account.  With that single purchase of $9.99, Amazon has just allowed 6 people to read the book simultaneously (family book club, anyone?).

Now, imagine a scenario where every single Kindle owner is forced to have their own Amazon Kindle account, with individual DRM rights, BUT they are allowed to "loan out" their books.

Kindle owners would get the benefit of being able to share their purchases, and Amazon would possibly reap higher sales from people that want to read the book at the same time.   i.e. If you and your best friend want to read the book at the same time, you both have to purchase a copy (good for Amazon).  Or your best friend will have to be patient and can "borrow" it after you are finished (good for Kindle owner).


----------



## Neversleepsawink;) (Dec 16, 2008)

Yikes, I'm so confused  .  Just know Kindle is wonderful, I love it.    No remorse for me


----------



## Jeff (Oct 28, 2008)

Attitudes change slowly but as most of you have said, they do change.

DRM protection of digital music, movies and books is built upon the licensing model whereby users do not own the product but have the right to use it on a specific platform under agreed upon conditions. It really doesn't work well for other content.

One of our newer members, Marl Coker, founded a web site where he sells eBooks without DRM. The books on his site are formatted for nearly every reader including the Kindle.

http://www.smashwords.com/

I joined yesterday but stopped short of publishing my books. I just can't decide if allowing my work to be distributed without DRM protection is a good business decision. If I had shareholders to answer to, I'd be even more reluctant.


----------



## Kathy (Nov 5, 2008)

ProfCrash said:


> That is not true. Many people have reported that they have been able to register a friends Kindle on their account, load books onto the new Kindle, deregister the Kindle, and the books have stayed on the Kindle. When the book is deleted, the person is not able to re-upload the book because it is not in their account.
> 
> Additionally, you can register multiple Kindles to an account with 6 people being able to have the same book on their Kindle at the same time. So the books are not specific to a Kindle but to a Kindle account.
> 
> JOkindle: If you wish to share books you can, you have to register that persons Kindle to your account, add the book, and then deregister their Kindle.


You are right, they are saying that. It is happening, but whenever you use the Whispernet it could then be removed. So far that is not happening, but I would be hesitant to register and deregister accounts multiple times. I wouldn't want to take a chance of losing all of my books. I did add that you can share an account.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

The whole idea of DRM media just being "Rented" is lazy thinking. You're buying an "item" for a platform or machine. Over the years, I've bought software for a Windows based PC, but now I have a Mac. Does that mean that old software is just rented? What about the audio books I bought on cassette tape? Are those just rented because I no longer own a cassette player? Should I be able to take my 10 year old cassettes tapes of _Lolita_ to the store I got them from and ask for a CD exchange?

Am I upset the the DRM books I bought in .LIT format before the Kindle ever existed are not completely legal to transfer over to my new device? Sure. I'd like to have my audio cassettes on CD or MP3 too, but it aint gonna happen just because I'd like it that way. I could, if I wanted, fire up an old PC and read the .LIT books, or buy a used cassette player at a yard sale, and still have full access to my old media.

If the music industry is any indication, I think, DRM will fade from ebooks in time as other business models show that content can be sold profitably without a huge loss to piracy. But the publishers need to know they still make enough money where their content is sold without DRM.


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

1. Clearly I have a very different understanding of "buyer's remorse". To me, that only applies to something you didn't buy. (Yes, I know what the number for shopaholics anonymous is. Stop PMing me! )
2. I don't fully understand DRM, but I do fully understand DRM in the following terms:
I once read in a WWII novel (a novel about WWII) that nobody could discuss what happened to Denmark without shouting. I have found this to be the case with all DRM discussions: No one can discuss DRM without shouting. Ever. In any forum. I may lobby my congressperson to immediately and forthwith put a ban on DRM public discussions.  
Not that it will do any good.

However, I have other fish to fry today. Metaphorically speaking. My sole contribution to the DRM discussion is the one I can make in terms of art.
I also collect art (You! There with the PM! STOP! I am not going to SA meetings!), and this summer, I bought my first original piece. The piece was created by a painter, and then licensed through someone else. While I own the original painting, there are a number of things about the painting (this one, and any other one) that I don't own, not the least of which is the right to reproduce the painting in any form. I also can't charge admission to my house (b/c that would be profiting from the image), and I can't make prints of the image and sell it. Nor can I put the image on a t-shirt or a tote bag or a coffee mug or whatever. I think, in the eyes of whoever it is that makes the rules about this drm stuff, they see the book the same way the artist and the licensing authority saw my painting: You are buying the book, or the CD, or the movie for _your_ personal benefit.

You know that warning on the beginning of movies? The one that says reproducing the movie, even if you don't intend to profit from the copy, is illegal? That's DRM. And while it's pretty easy to hand someone a book or a movie or a CD, you are technically in violation of the agreement between you and the owner of the copyright if you do lend it out. But it's pretty much fruitless for anyone to step in and make you keep your items to yourself, so nobody much makes a big deal about it.
Except when it comes to a digital form of the book or the cd or the movie. As we are all aware, nobody is publishing books or cds or movies for the good of the public (for the most part); they're publishing these things for the money. And if you're allowed to give away a digital copy of a book or a movie or a cd, you're cutting into someone's profit. So, while Amazon could probably do some things to sidestep the whole DRM issue, 
1. Publishers would yank their stuff faster than you could say "I was reading that!", and it would cut into the publisher's profit
2. Amazon isn't going to do anything that's going to cut into their own profit. It flies in the face of the idea of survival of the fittest.
And even though most people are going to try to break the rules and mass distribute digital media, no publisher of any sort of digital content is willing to take the chance that their media will get pirated. And if you "give" a digital copy of a book to someone who didn't pay for it, that is piracy in the eyes of whoever it is that sits around thinking up these rules.

It's not fair, and it is gross generalization, but remember: you can buy any of the movies that came out last weekend at the movies right now on DVD if you know where to go look. You think that doesn't cut into a publisher's profits? Right. They'd impose the death sentence on media pirates if the world would go for it.

Okay, so having failed to clear all that up, let's stop shouting and talk about something we can all get behind. Like naming our Kindles <ducks flying gnome.>


----------



## stevene9 (Nov 9, 2008)

Just Wondering said:


> I suspect it won't be long before book publishers realize that the nature of the book product is such that there is unlikely to be widespread file sharing problems.


I disagree. There is already a guy in England trying to sell a DVD with hundreds of ebooks on it. Unless the prices go really low, like $1 or less a copy, I think there would be a lot of file sharing (stealing). Buy a DVD with all of Henlein's books, or Asimov, or Butcher (you can see I am a sci fi fan). With no copy protection, I think you would see a lot of that type of theft.

Steve


----------



## Good Old Neon (Jan 14, 2009)

When you pass from this life, and you will, you will do so alone, without benefit from a lifetime of accumulated detritus, DRM or no DRM.


----------



## Gables Girl (Oct 28, 2008)

robin.goodfellow said:


> 1. Clearly I have a very different understanding of "buyer's remorse". To me, that only applies to something you didn't buy.


Robin, I knew I liked you for some reason. I agree totally, I buy what I want when I want it. Yes, I have just myself to think about and pay for, but that is my choice.

I learned from my parents that life is too short to deny yourself things that make you happy. My Kindle 1 ME and soon to be K2 make me happy as do my DRM books. Do I like DRM, no but I think over time it will change. Until then I'm not denying myself the pleasure of reading the same way I didn't mind buying hardback books and not waiting for the paperback version.


----------



## Anju  (Nov 8, 2008)

Very well put Robin


----------



## stevene9 (Nov 9, 2008)

I believe buyers remorse is when you buy something and then have second thoughts about the purchase. I do not think it applies to something you haven't bought.

Steve


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

stevene9 said:


> I believe buyers remorse is when you buy something and then have second thoughts about the purchase. I do not think it applies to something you haven't bought.
> 
> Steve


One of the sad differences between men and women when it comes to shopping....


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I am a woman and I agree with steven. That's how I understand buyers remorse 

You can't regret or having remorse of buying something if you didn't buy it.


----------



## sherylb (Oct 27, 2008)

Yeah, what Robin said!


----------



## Guest (Feb 17, 2009)

stevene9 said:


> I believe buyers remorse is when you buy something and then have second thoughts about the purchase. I do not think it applies to something you haven't bought.
> 
> Steve


This is the correct usage.


----------



## LDB (Oct 28, 2008)

Remorse: –noun
1. deep and painful regret for wrongdoing; compunction.

By definition one would be hard pressed to have buyer's remorse over an item not purchased. One would really have to stretch things to call remorse over anything to do with "buying" since wrongdoing isn't generally a part of a purchase process, nor is deep and painful regret. If one were to use the money for the baby's lifesaving medicine to purchase CD's then remorse might be valid. I believe it is used inappropriately in most cases simply because it's become a cliche.

One might argue that buyer's regret is appropriate in some cases but that again is probably too strong a term for the no greater than trivial annoyance one may feel upon arriving home without that 12th pair of green shoes or that 17th brown purse or that 14th ball peen hammer or whatever the item may have been. Conversely, one may feel the same way when putting on the 12th pair of green shoes and realizing at least half of the other 11 pairs would have sufficed nicely.

Buyer's return to common sense is probably the most accurate description.


----------



## Angela (Nov 2, 2008)

I have no remorse where my Kindle is concerned. I was a bit bummed at first that I couldn't *share* my books anymore with my best friend, but that problem is now solved with the purchase of a gently used K1 that I will be giving to her and it will be registered to my account. I wanted to give one to my mom (my other book sharing buddy) but she refuses!! She is the only one with remorse now!


----------



## JOkindle (Feb 17, 2009)

too too funny! shoulda known, on a board geared to kindle/reading folks, semantics would play a big part...

transfer/copy
share/steal
& discussion about the use of the word "remorse"

love it!

actually, coincidentally, on the news today I heard the anchor/reporter say something about "remorse" regarding the bailout/spending/stimulus... (now, there's some playing w/ semantics, hmmmmm!)

my kindle was a gift, so I guess I don't have the right to use "buyer's" in my title. And to be honest, I don't actually feel any remorse whatsoever; I love my kindle, but the old habit of wanting to SHARE (not steal, not copy) loved books won't disappear anytime soon. And I strongly believe amazon could do something to provide capabilities for transfer.


----------



## Mikuto (Oct 30, 2008)

JOkindle said:


> too too funny! shoulda known, on a board geared to kindle/reading folks, semantics would play a big part...
> 
> transfer/copy
> share/steal
> ...


You should e-mail amazon.com about your desire to share your books with family members who are not on your Kindle account. Perhaps bring up the idea of transferring the DRM license that was suggested here. Amazon Customer Support is really attentive and we can see from the Kindle 2.0 that they do listen to criticism about their device.


----------



## stevene9 (Nov 9, 2008)

JOkindle said:


> too too funny! shoulda known, on a board geared to kindle/reading folks, semantics would play a big part...
> transfer/copy
> share/steal
> & discussion about the use of the word "remorse"ve amazon could do something to provide capabilities for transfer.


True, so true. But look at it this way. It's better than discussing 
swindle/scam
right wing/left wing
murderer/child molester
Senator/Congressman

I'd much rather discuss "remorse" and "copy/steal" than these other worldly topics.

Steve


----------



## rho (Feb 12, 2009)

robin.goodfellow said:


> I also collect art (You! There with the PM! STOP! I am not going to SA meetings!), and this summer, I bought my first original piece. The piece was created by a painter, and then licensed through someone else. While I own the original painting, there are a number of things about the painting (this one, and any other one) that I don't own, not the least of which is the right to reproduce the painting in any form. I also can't charge admission to my house (b/c that would be profiting from the image), and I can't make prints of the image and sell it. Nor can I put the image on a t-shirt or a tote bag or a coffee mug or whatever. I think, in the eyes of whoever it is that makes the rules about this drm stuff, they see the book the same way the artist and the licensing authority saw my painting: You are buying the book, or the CD, or the movie for _your_ personal benefit. d while it's pretty easy to hand someone a book or a movie or a CD, you are technically


Did you also know that if you wanted to change the painting you bought in anyway you aren't allowed by law to do that either .... just one of those little trivia things my strange mind collects 

Personally I never gave away or loaned out any of my books - which is why space became such an issue and why I love my Kindle -- so I don't get the whole complaint about loaning out the book or giving it to the library when you are done with it -- I am never done with it -- I will reread it time and again. And I tried to figure out how many books I have read and by my estimations I read 1500 by the time I was 25 or so -- and I am 55 now -  so I guess I have read a LOT of books


----------



## Kathy (Nov 5, 2008)

rho said:


> Personally I never gave away or loaned out any of my books - which is why space became such an issue and why I love my Kindle -- so I don't get the whole complaint about loaning out the book or giving it to the library when you are done with it -- I am never done with it -- I will reread it time and again. And I tried to figure out how many books I have read and by my estimations I read 1500 by the time I was 25 or so -- and I am 55 now -  so I guess I have read a LOT of books


I'm the same way, I just can't part with a book. I would buy another copy to give to my daughter rather than give mine away. I didn't really want the Kindle to save money. I needed a way to carry multiple books when I travel. I'm on the road a lot with work and I was carrying 4 and 5 books with me. Now I have all the books I want in one place. I also think that Amazon is giving anyone that wants a way to share books by allowing multiple Kindles on an account. I realize that it can be hard to share accounts with non-family members, but it is still an option. I'm sure that in the future there will be a way to share drm books, but right now this is what we have. I have no remorse at all and will probably spend to much on books, but heck I was already spending to much on books.

Glad that everyone can share thoughts and still remain so pleasant. This is a great board.


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

stargazer0725 said:


> But you specifically mentioned registering and then deregistering the Kindle from the account, once the download is accomplished. In this fashion, a person could register and deregister 50 Kindles and transfer the same books to all 50 Kindles. This totally circumvents the intent of the DRM agreement.


No, you can't. Amazon keeps track of how many Kindles the book has been shared with and when a single book has been shared among 6 Kindles, that's it. No more sharing.

L


----------



## chiffchaff (Dec 19, 2008)

stevene9 said:


> I believe buyers remorse is when you buy something and then have second thoughts about the purchase. I do not think it applies to something you haven't bought.


I think it does for Robin (i.e. I assumed she was joking  )


----------



## LDB (Oct 28, 2008)

stevene9 said:


> True, so true. But look at it this way. It's better than discussing
> swindle/scam
> right wing/left wing
> murderer/child molester
> Senator/Congressman


Not a lot to discuss with black and white subjects.


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

chiffchaff said:


> I think it does for Robin (i.e. I assumed she was joking  )


Oh, how my credit card company wishes I was joking.


----------



## sjc (Oct 29, 2008)

OK...my two cents. I think the bottom line is publishers and authors are still running scared. Three weeks ago I met with one publisher in person and she was skeptical about infringement and theft...I set her straight. She is now in negotiations with her publisher to jump on the Kindle-wagon.

If you worked so hard at something all your life (for some) only to have it stolen...you WOULD be hesitant. Benjamin wasn't all wrong; he just comes on a bit headstrong. The bottom line: we, like Amazon and Jeff Bezos,...want every book *ever published and every author and publisher* to be on board. Rome wasn't built in a day. Look at how few Kindlebooks were available one year ago; vs. today. A milestone. Keep the faith.


----------



## Gables Girl (Oct 28, 2008)

robin.goodfellow said:


> Oh, how my credit card company wishes I was joking.


My savings wishes I was joking.


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

> Did you also know that if you wanted to change the painting you bought in anyway you aren't allowed by law to do that either .... just one of those little trivia things my strange mind collects


I did not know that Rho, but what an interesting piece of trivia it is. How did you know that? I'm guessing it's not from experience, but if it is, we certainly want to hear details. lol, unless they're sealed by the court, of course.

lol, I also think it's really funny that it was mostly men who think I don't understand buyer's remorse, and mostly women who thought, "You know, I had never considered that before, but yes, I believe that is also a workable definition." lol, no hard feelings, just an observation. I do understand the traditional definition of buyer's remorse, there's just so little that I would like that I don't buy....It's my small way of attempting to keep the economy going.


----------



## standaman (Feb 11, 2009)

stargazer0725 said:


> I actually agree with this point. I understand that they want to prevent unauthorized copying of the digital content, but I think there is an easy work-around:
> 
> Amazon needs to add a feature to both the Kindle Store and the Kindles themselves, allowing consumers to send their digital purchases to other Kindle owners. Once they are sent to the next Kindle owner, the content is then deregistered from the initial purchaser's library (either deleted entirely, or even better still listed in your library, but locked and marked with a "Loaned to Jane Doe's Kindle").
> 
> ...


I REALLY like this idea. I wonder if they'll actually put the time to figure this out. Chances are they won't though. c'est la vie.


----------



## Jesslyn (Oct 29, 2008)

I hope this comes out coherent....
I was talking to a co-worker today about various subjects.  The main one being how I was sick of all the Kindle-bashing because most of the reviewers that I've read who are doing the bashing don't own a Kindle.  In any case, he said that its hard to envision some concepts without first interacting with them in some way.  His example was about Netflix.  He stated that he just didn't get it before he joined; that he was way into ownership--just because.  That prior to joining Netflix, he purchased DVDs so he could 'own' them, but that Netflix has changed that dynamic for him and that he doesn't feel obligated to 'own' every movie he watches anymore.  

While the Kindle isn't exactly that model, for me its similar.  When I 1st joined iTunes, I was not the biggest fan of DRM; since then I have realized that as long as I can add computers to my account it really hasn't affected me at all.  I have my music on my iPod, iPhone, PC and laptop.  Thats all I need it for.  With the Kindle, I have my books on my Kindle and if my husband ever jumps on the bandwagon, they'll be available to him as well.  And just in case Amazon goes away one day, I download all my books to storage and forget about them.  

This is going to sound callous, but I don't mean it that way--I just don't know another way to say it.  If someone wants to read a Kindle book, they can sample it and if they like it--buy it.  If they don't have enough $ to purchase, then they probably shouldn't have gotten the Kindle to begin with and maybe the library is a better place for them to get their books.  Its no different from folks that use the library instead of buying all their books.

That said, I bought it, I paid for it and it is available for me to read.  I would think that publishers and authors would be happier with that model as the more people that creates a need for more book purchases since you can't just hand it over to anyone who will in turn give the book to someone else.  As a reader, as long as I can re-read the thing, what do I care?

Just my $.02


----------



## Panjo (Dec 21, 2008)

JOkindle said:


> I'll start this topic out using a quote from another kindle owner:
> 
> _*"I didnt buy books, I bought the right of rental-vision or the right to read the book, on their device."*_


I'm so glad you posted here, I saw that original post and was wondering what the "experts" thought about it. Great thread!


----------



## Micdiddy (Nov 29, 2008)

Out of all the opinions on this thread I definitely agree with Jesslyn the most. It is simply bad business to allow for too many copies of your product to be so easy to obtain for free. Yes, theortetically being able to "share" a book with any Kindle so that you lose it while the other Kindle has it, is exactly the same as sharing a DTB, but in reality it is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. I cannot just give any old DTB to someone across the country in a few seconds, the transferring and sharing of DTB's doesn't effect the market so much because of the inconvenience, to allow the same thing for digital books could be market suicide.
If you know what you are buying, then there is no reason to complain. Even if it is true that "I didn’t buy books, I bought the right of rental-vision or the right to read the book, on their device" I ask myself is it worth 9.99 to rent the vision of this book to read on this device? Call it whatever you want, and then decide if it is worth what you paid for it, but don't complain about how things could be different---or rather, complain all you want, but don't expect change or sympathy, imo.
"Things could be different, but they're not." - Kevin Barnes.


----------



## TM (Nov 25, 2008)

Leslie said:


> No, you can't. Amazon keeps track of how many Kindles the book has been shared with and when a single book has been shared among 6 Kindles, that's it. No more sharing.
> 
> L


Okay - now that may end up being a problem they will need to deal with in the future - like for Version 3 or 4! Becuase if you have say 3 kindles on your account, each Kindle downlaods all the books and each kindle gets upgraded when a new version comes out... by version 3, none of the older books will work.


----------



## rho (Feb 12, 2009)

robin.goodfellow said:


> I did not know that Rho, but what an interesting piece of trivia it is. How did you know that? I'm guessing it's not from experience, but if it is, we certainly want to hear details. lol, unless they're sealed by the court, of course.


nothing as interesting as that - just from knowing some artists  I've had a few debates with them about that - I feel if I buy the Mona Lisa and want to paint a moustache on her it is mine and I should be able to do it -- can you tell they are heated debates from time to time hehehe


----------



## ErinLindsey (Jan 18, 2009)

I read the post that the original poster in this thread is quoting from (it was on another website) 

The person she's quoting was mad because she'd bought a Kindle, downloaded some books to it, and then decided to sell her Kindle and the books to someone else. The person who bought the Kindle thought they were getting the Kindle AND the content of the books. When they found out that the books dont transfer over, they returned the Kindle to her. (I'm guessing she's going to try to sell her Kindle again) 

The person who originally owned the Kindle was mad because she couldnt transfer ownership of the ebooks she'd bought, and seemed to be mad that she couldnt read the ebooks on her computer.  

Basically she was mad because she hadnt really researched the Kindle and how it works before buying it. (and she admitted that)


----------



## LDB (Oct 28, 2008)

ErinLindsey said:


> The person she's quoting was mad because she'd bought a Kindle, downloaded some books to it, and then decided to sell her Kindle and the books to someone else. The person who bought the Kindle thought they were getting the Kindle AND the content of the books.


That's an understandable situation. If a person wants to transfer the rights and ownership of their Kindle and it's content to another individual they should be able to. They've paid for it. If Amazon were a government entity they'd possibly be in violation of the fourth amendment. This policy is wrong and should be eliminated.


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

Micdiddy said:


> Out of all the opinions on this thread I definitely agree with Jesslyn the most. It is simply bad business to allow for too many copies of your product to be so easy to obtain for free. Yes, theortetically being able to "share" a book with any Kindle so that you lose it while the other Kindle has it, is exactly the same as sharing a DTB, but in reality it is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. I cannot just give any old DTB to someone across the country in a few seconds, the transferring and sharing of DTB's doesn't effect the market so much because of the inconvenience, to allow the same thing for digital books could be market suicide.


Very good point. In all this talk about sharing DTBs, I wonder how much people actually do share? I mean, is every person out there (except me) a living lending library? In my experience, the MOST people I have ever shared a book with is 2: my mother and my sister. The book usually travels in a linear fashion (Leslie -> mom -> sis or whatever) and stays with the last person who read it. When my sister moved a few years ago, I got back a ton of books from her, which was unexpected. But she didn't want to pay to move them.



> If you know what you are buying, then there is no reason to complain. Even if it is true that "I didn't buy books, I bought the right of rental-vision or the right to read the book, on their device" I ask myself is it worth 9.99 to rent the vision of this book to read on this device? Call it whatever you want, and then decide if it is worth what you paid for it, but don't complain about how things could be different---or rather, complain all you want, but don't expect change or sympathy, imo.
> "Things could be different, but they're not." - Kevin Barnes.


Well said. Thanks.

L


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

TM said:


> Okay - now that may end up being a problem they will need to deal with in the future - like for Version 3 or 4! Becuase if you have say 3 kindles on your account, each Kindle downlaods all the books and each kindle gets upgraded when a new version comes out... by version 3, none of the older books will work.


Well, I guess we'll cross that bridge when we get to it, won't we?

L


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

ErinLindsey said:


> I read the post that the original poster in this thread is quoting from (it was on another website)
> 
> The person she's quoting was mad because she'd bought a Kindle, downloaded some books to it, and then decided to sell her Kindle and the books to someone else. The person who bought the Kindle thought they were getting the Kindle AND the content of the books. When they found out that the books dont transfer over, they returned the Kindle to her. (I'm guessing she's going to try to sell her Kindle again)


From what others have posted here, the books would have transferred over. However, if the new owner removed them from his/her Kindle, then they would be gone forever.



> The person who originally owned the Kindle was mad because she couldnt transfer ownership of the ebooks she'd bought, and seemed to be mad that she couldnt read the ebooks on her computer.
> 
> Basically she was mad because she hadnt really researched the Kindle and how it works before buying it. (and she admitted that)


Well then, she shouldn't be having "buyer's remorse" she should be having "I didn't do my homework and am now paying the price" remorse. To me, that's not the same thing.

L


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

ErinLindsey said:


> ... The person who bought the Kindle thought they were getting the Kindle AND the content of the books. When they found out that the books dont transfer over, they returned the Kindle to her. (I'm guessing she's going to try to sell her Kindle again)


Hello, everyone, this is my first post here. I don't have a kindle but will by one - just waiting to save up some more coupons from my Amazon.com Visa card.

I was thinking about the above situation, and I think that it would actually be possible to transfer ownership of the books with the kindle - basically you give your Amazon account to the new person! You change the email address on your amazon account to the buyer's email, change the password (and give the new password to the buyer), cancel any periodical subscriptions you have, remove saved ship-to addresses, and remove your credit card on file. This account now belongs to the buyer of the kindle, so they have permanent rights to the books.

Of course there are a couple downsides to this. You can't pick and choose which books to give - you loose them all. You also loose anything else associated with that account, such as purchase history of anything you bought from amazon. I assume you'd also loose other drm downloads, such as if you bought music? Anything else?

I'm wondering... you can have more than one kindle on one account, but can you have more than one account for one kindle? I'm thinking no... but for instance, lets say my husband and I each had a kindle and separate kindle accounts. Maybe we weren't aware that we could share books (buy a book once and have it on both kindles) if we used one account. Or maybe we want to sell one kindle and transfer all the books to the one kindle we're keeping. Is there any way to "merge" them into one account? If so, then in theory.. I could set up a new Amazon account for book purchases. Buy several books. Then decide I don't want them any more. Could I give that account to another kindle owner - changing the email address and password... I could do this if the other person is about to purchase a kindle and doesn't already have an amazon account with kindle books they've bought. But if they DO already have an account, is there a way to merge them? If so, THAT'S how you give away books. Even if this works, it's not a great way to "lend" a single book, but it's a way for a kindle owner to sell their kindle AND all the books on it.

Cathy


----------



## Gables Girl (Oct 28, 2008)

Leslie said:


> Very good point. In all this talk about sharing DTBs, I wonder how much people actually do share? I mean, is every person out there (except me) a living lending library? In my experience, the MOST people I have ever shared a book with is 2: my mother and my sister. The book usually travels in a linear fashion (Leslie -> mom -> sis or whatever) and stays with the last person who read it. When my sister moved a few years ago, I got back a ton of books from her, which was unexpected. But she didn't want to pay to move them.
> 
> L


Well said Leslie. I was one of those that didn't share my DTBs, I am a careful reader and don't mess up my books. Many of them I never even broke the spin on when I read them. The few I shared over the years came back in less then pristine condition so I didn't share my books. I had a few people in my family that would read a book and return it in good condition so I would loan to them. So I really don't miss the sharing aspect of having a Kindle. I moved way too many books the last time I moved, since I tend to keep all of my books, so the Kindle will save me a ton a money moving.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

> Very good point. In all this talk about sharing DTBs, I wonder how much people actually do share? I mean, is every person out there (except me) a living lending library? In my experience, the MOST people I have ever shared a book with is 2: my mother and my sister. The book usually travels in a linear fashion (Leslie -> mom -> sis or whatever) and stays with the last person who read it. When my sister moved a few years ago, I got back a ton of books from her, which was unexpected. But she didn't want to pay to move them.


Agreed. Which is why I see the register/deregister thing as a grey area. The only people I want to share e-books with are family members, my SIL and Brother. I share physical books with them, I would like to be able to share my e-books with them. I understand the copyright issues. I don't want to post on Craig's List that I have these books that I will give to someone for free. We don't want to share an account because there are three different people and keeping track of who bought what would be a bit of a pain in the butt. So If I want my SIL to try a new author who I like, I want to be able to share that book with her.

When I got my Kindle I was the only person in the family with one. Now that others in my family are buying Kindle (based on my loving the thing) it is not so much a problem as a bit of an ethical dilemma. I don't want to screw the author out of the money they earned but I don't feel like I did that when I lent out my physical books to my family. So why should it be different with an e-book?

The big difference between the e-book and the physical book that I see is that we both have a copy of the book which would not be the case with the physical book. If we were on the same account, this wouldn't be an issue. All three of us could read the same book with only one pesrson paying for it. Because we are two seperate households and want to have seperate accounts we cannot share books.

Maybe Amazon could set up a family and friends programs that allows people to link accounts with a set number of accounts. You cannot transfer books from account to account but you can borrow books on someone else account. Perhaps limit the number of books that you can borrow at any one time so that people still have an incentive to buy their own books.


----------



## sherylb (Oct 27, 2008)

You can share your ebook...you just have to share your Kindle too!


----------



## Guest (Feb 18, 2009)

Leslie said:


> Very good point. In all this talk about sharing DTBs, I wonder how much people actually do share? I mean, is every person out there (except me) a living lending library? In my experience, the MOST people I have ever shared a book with is 2: my mother and my sister. The book usually travels in a linear fashion (Leslie -> mom -> sis or whatever) and stays with the last person who read it. When my sister moved a few years ago, I got back a ton of books from her, which was unexpected. But she didn't want to pay to move them.


We share out a lot of books. I always have.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

sherylb said:


> You can share your ebook...you just have to share your Kindle too!


Shipping Tavar to Chicago strikes me as inefficient.


----------



## Kathy (Nov 5, 2008)

vermontcathy said:


> I'm wondering... you can have more than one kindle on one account, but can you have more than one account for one kindle? I'm thinking no... but for instance, lets say my husband and I each had a kindle and separate kindle accounts. Maybe we weren't aware that we could share books (buy a book once and have it on both kindles) if we used one account. Or maybe we want to sell one kindle and transfer all the books to the one kindle we're keeping. Is there any way to "merge" them into one account? If so, then in theory.. I could set up a new Amazon account for book purchases. Buy several books. Then decide I don't want them any more. Could I give that account to another kindle owner - changing the email address and password... I could do this if the other person is about to purchase a kindle and doesn't already have an amazon account with kindle books they've bought. But if they DO already have an account, is there a way to merge them? If so, THAT'S how you give away books. Even if this works, it's not a great way to "lend" a single book, but it's a way for a kindle owner to sell their kindle AND all the books on it.
> 
> Cathy


First of all welcome. A Kindle can only be on one account. I don't know if you can merge the accounts, but Amazon is great with their customer service and make be able to merge accounts. When you set up your account with Amazon, you are using a username and password, email address and other personal information, so I would not want to transfer my account to another person. Each time you create an account on Amazon, you have to choose a username and password and would not be able to reuse the original one created. I try to keep all of my accounts with the same username so I don't have to figure out which one to use.

Kathy


----------



## sherylb (Oct 27, 2008)

ProfCrash said:


> Shipping Tavar to Chicago strikes me as inefficient.


Highly inefficient, I agree. However, you would have to ship a DTB wouldn't you?


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

NOpe, they would have picked it up when they came to visit or I would have brought it to them when they visited.


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

You've made an inspired suggestion there, cathy in vermont, but I think you'd be taking a terrible risk on identity theft if you actually tried it. And, it's probably just me, but if they've gone to the time and trouble to buy a kindle, then it shouldn't be too much of a burden on them to actually buy the books. B/c, here's a thought, what if they don't like the type of books that you've purchased? I mean, if I were to buy a kindle used from a third party, and that person was into, say, books about marmosets, I wouldn't be at all interested in those. And that could, hypothetically, lead to the buyer wanting a refund of the purchases, or some sort of stipend towards books they actually do want to read. It could get really messy in a big ole hurry.



> Well then, she shouldn't be having "buyer's remorse" she should be having "I didn't do my homework and am now paying the price" remorse. To me, that's not the same thing.


Leslie, you've nailed it there. I completely agree with that statement.


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

Kathy said:


> ...When you set up your account with Amazon, you are using a username and password, email address and other personal information, so I would not want to transfer my account to another person. Each time you create an account on Amazon, you have to choose a username and password and would not be able to reuse the original one created. I try to keep all of my accounts with the same username so I don't have to figure out which one to use.
> 
> Kathy


This isn't a big deal to me, just a philosophical thing, since I probably wouldn't want to give up all the books I'd bought. But one thought - when I log on to Amazon.com, I only put an email address and a password, both of which can be changed. It displays my name, but that can be changed, too. So unless I'm missing something, there's no username that you would be giving up. It seems like there is NO single identifying thing (that can't be changed) that links an Amazon account to a particular person.


----------



## Kathy (Nov 5, 2008)

vermontcathy said:


> This isn't a big deal to me, just a philosophical thing, since I probably wouldn't want to give up all the books I'd bought. But one thought - when I log on to Amazon.com, I only put an email address and a password, both of which can be changed. It displays my name, but that can be changed, too. So unless I'm missing something, there's no username that you would be giving up. It seems like there is NO single identifying thing (that can't be changed) that links an Amazon account to a particular person.


If you change the email address and password associated to the email address it becomes a new account. You can change the password, but if you change both it will then create a new account. Hope this explains it better.


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

Kathy said:


> If you change the email address and password associated to the email address it becomes a new account. You can change the password, but if you change both it will then create a new account. Hope this explains it better.


I didn't find that to be true. I changed my password, saved, then changed my email address, saved (so I did this in two different steps) and it is still the same account. I know this because of the addresses in my address book, and items in my shopping "list".

Cathy


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

But will that work if the credit card you change no longer matches the name on the account?  Generally, that's a fail on purchase-oriented websites:  the name on the card doesn't match the name on the account or the shipping address, and it's not being sent as a gift.  I would think that would flag the account for amazon, and the least amazon would do is suspend the account until they could work out what was going on.  In all, it seems to me like it would be far more trouble than it would be rewarding.

On the other hand, that's also why I order in on nights that I don't go out to eat.


----------



## Gables Girl (Oct 28, 2008)

robin.goodfellow said:


> In all, it seems to me like it would be far more trouble than it would be rewarding.
> 
> On the other hand, that's also why I order in on nights that I don't go out to eat.


I do pick up on my way home from work or order in on weekends.  More Kindle time.


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

robin.goodfellow said:


> But will that work if the credit card you change no longer matches the name on the account? Generally, that's a fail on purchase-oriented websites: the name on the card doesn't match the name on the account or the shipping address, and it's not being sent as a gift. I would think that would flag the account for amazon, and the least amazon would do is suspend the account until they could work out what was going on. In all, it seems to me like it would be far more trouble than it would be rewarding.


But you can change the name on the account to whoever is buying your kindle. You can remove your credit card from the account and the new buyer can add his or hers at a later date. So there wouldn't be any case of trying to ship something to a name/address that doesn't match a credit card on file. I agree that this would all take a little time and work, too much trouble for just trying to give away a few books. But if someone really isn't the type to want to save their books, and really wants to sell a kindle with the books (or already DID sell a kindle, and promised the buyer the books), they can do it.

Cathy


----------



## davem2bits (Feb 2, 2009)

luvmy4brats said:


> One of the sad differences between men and women when it comes to shopping....


Shopping? What's shopping?


----------



## Kind (Jan 28, 2009)

stargazer0725 said:


> It would be just like loaning out a book...you wouldn't have the rights to read the material until the borrower sent it back to you.


That's a pretty good idea actually. Feasible? Yes. Do they want to do that? Probably not.


----------



## The Kindle Kid (Feb 23, 2009)

I have not read through every post so I apologize if this has already been mentioned.

When you buy a book you can read it and lend it to a friend when you are done. You can do the same thing with your Kindle. You can buy a book and put it on your Kindle and lend your Kindle to your friend. Most people obviously would not want to do that, but that is your choice. It can be done if you choose to do it.


----------



## RodgzK (Jan 19, 2009)

This seems to be a pretty reasonable solution to me but I doubt that Amazon or the authors would support it.


----------

