Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
or don't you remember them deleting 1984?
That wasn't censorship, it was correcting an error with appropriate refunds. I don't think they are particularly evil or controlling, just very tempting.
Yes, they were, They deleted it WITH NO NOTICE OR WARNING. Had they had anything resembling conscience, *they* would have paid the royalties, and eaten the difference.
Where did you see something that suggested that would have been an option? I thought it was dictated by the publisher holding the rights. In any case, that goes with the concept of DRM controlled content, and while the device is somewhat oriented to their versions of things, from what I've seen it is not particularly restricted.
No, *I* suggested that option. Just now. Actually, I said it to folks talking about it at the time it happened. Why would you *not* think that was an option?
Further, the point is that they had remote control over devices they allegedly *sold*, not rented, that allowed them to erase content without the *owner's* consent.
If you really want to continue this conversation, please reply to me offlist.
mark