Amazon invokes DMCA against Kindle e-books from other vendors

MobileRead.com posted a letter this week that Amazon.com apparently sent regarding alleged copyright violations. This is an excerpt.

When President Clinton signed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act into law 11 years ago, he predicted it will "protect from digital piracy the copyright industries that comprise the leading export of the United States."

The DMCA turned out to be much broader than that. This week, an e-book Web site said Amazon.com invoked the 1998 law to prevent books from some non-Amazon sources from working on its Kindle reader.

Amazon sent a legal notice to MobileRead.com complaining that information relating to a computer utility written in the Python programming language "constitutes a violation" of the DMCA, according to a copy of the warning letter that the site posted. MobileRead.com is an e-book news and community site.

MobileRead.com forum moderator Alexander Turcic said in a post on Thursday that although he did not believe the program violated the law, the site would "voluntarily follow their request and remove links and detailed instructions related to it." Turcic said that, contrary to Amazon's claim, his site never "hosted" the software.

Amazon did not respond to a request for comment on Friday.

The author of the software in question, titled Kindlepid.py, is listed as Igor Skochinsky, a hardware hacker who performed a remarkable analysis of the Kindle and described in December 2007 how he was able to gain access to the device.

It's unclear why Amazon waited so long to respond with a legal threat, and why the company targeted MobileRead.com: Skochinsky's original blog post about Kindlepid.py is dated December 2007, and the copy of the Kindlepid.py software hosted at the Googlepages.com Web-page posting site is still available for download at http://skochinsky.googlepages.com/azw-0.2.zip.

Kindlepid.py and a related piece of accompanying Python code don't allow piracy. Rather, they accomplish something akin to the opposite: they allow legally purchased books from other e-book stores to be used on the Kindle. (Amazon owns MobiPocket, one of those stores. Another would be OverDrive.com, which counts schools and libraries as customers.)

In theory, at least, this could threaten Amazon's business model, which provides wireless connectivity through Sprint's EV-DO cellular data network and covers the cost through items purchased from the Amazon Kindle Store. Kindle customers can also e-mail themselves documents to be converted at 10 cents per conversion.

A copy of a MobileRead.com wiki page--now empty--saved in Google's cache says Kindlepid.py allows you to "obtain books from sites that use DRM (Digital Rights Management - encryption) on their books for specific devices. This includes book sellers and public libraries." It provides instructions on how to install and use the software.

MobileRead.com readers with Kindles were not pleased with Amazon. "What this script does is make the Kindle more useful," wrote one reader. "With Amazon using the DMCA to get rid of this, they are alienating their customers and causing prospective customers to purchase a different device."

And the Kindlefix.py code is already being mirrored, including in a post on Slashdot.org.

Section 1201 of the DMCA says: "No person shall... offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology... is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."

One exception to the DMCA's general rule, however, comes a few paragraphs later. It says circumvention is permissible for "interoperability" of computer programs, with interoperability defined as the "ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged."

If Amazon were to press its case against Kindlefix.py, another legal claim could involve reverse engineering, which is prohibited by the Kindle terms of use. They say users may not "circumvent any of the functions or protections of the Device or Software or any mechanisms operatively linked to the Software, including, but not limited to, augmenting or substituting any digital rights management functionality of the Device or Software."

This isn't the only legal spat that's arisen over the Kindle 2. Last month, the Authors Guild claimed that the mechanical text-to-speech converter was a violation of copyright law.

[HlLLARY CLITON]

I returned my Kindle II today and ordered a Sony reader...I'm sick of Amazon

[shootthecops]

totalitarian technology. as if the DRM wasnt a red flag...

[assman]

Uh.. what's wrong with them protecting their copyright? If they didn't, publishers would refuse to partner with the Kindle program.

[Mergatroid Mania]

Why? There's no piracy or copyright infringement involved. All their doing is forcing people to purchase their reading material from Amazon. What copyright are they protecting?
Publishers don't need to "partner" with the kindle program, it's just a display device with DRM built into it. Anything with DRM built in has been purchased, so the publishers have made their money no matter where the material was purchased from.

[AFC RW]

There's nothing wrong with them protecting their copyright, but that's not what they're doing: the script in question doesn't have anything to do with anything they have a copyright *on.*

[FellowConspirator]

The problem is that they are asserting a copyright claim where it doesn't apply. The script in question permits you to place your own files on the Kindle - your won writings, public domain things, and other legally purchased documents. Copyright simply doesn't apply. BUT, the reason they backed down is that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act doesn't actually limit itself to copyrighted materials. The text of the DMCA applies to all things in digital form and proscribes protections on mechanisms of access to digital devices (regardless of copyright concerns).

The DMCA, for example, would permit your ISP to sue you if you altered your cable modem settings to change the password, for example.

[mectron]

DRM is wrong on ALL levels. It serve no useful purpose, as NO benefits of any kind to the consumers, is ILLEGAL in most country. It only purpose is to illegally inflate prices and prevent you from using a device that you own have have paid FOR! . Look at the iPod, it's whole business is based on ripping consumers.

[Mergatroid Mania]

Wow, who would even buy a kindle now if they read carefully the terms of use? If it will only work on books purchased from one source why would anyone want one?
It's too bad no one came to the legal aid of MobileRead.com. It's so obvious that the DMCA was not being violated. How does Amazon even stay in business anymore?
Lets see Amazon post the offending portion of their user agreement in big bold letters that must be read before you can purchase a kindle. And then lets see how many people purchase a device that effectively says "You can only read material purchased from us on this device".
Who would buy a display device that restricts what you can display? Talk about biting the hand that feeds them.

[Maccess]

Section 1201 of the DMCA says: "No person shall... offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology... is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."

The section refers to "access to a work," the hack allows use of legally purchased works to be accessed with the (Kindle) device. Hmm, someone should do a test case for this. IIRC, this would be similar to the printer manufacturers claim that only their expensive print cartridges can be used in their devices. That was overturned in court which ruled the printer makers could not prevent others from sellling "compatible" print cartridges and inks.

[Imalittleteapot]

Uncompiled source code should be protected by the First Amendment. It's just an expression of an idea in text form just like a book or instruction manual is. The source code doesn't do anything. It can't circumvent anything. The only thing it can do is tell a Python interpreter how to circumvent something. A Python interpreter that the author is not providing as far as I know. Just like a instruction manual for building a gun can't kill anyone. You need a gun maker to read the instruction list and make a gun out of the instructions. However, the instructions are still not a gun. They're two different things.

Same thing here. I'm looking at kindlefix.py right now. It's just Python source that a computer wouldn't understand. It's only when you put it together with an interpreter do you get the actual program (the gun if you will.) The author isn't distributing Python (the gun maker). They're just expressing themselves and their ideas through the language of Python code just like any author would. They just chose a different language. They could have written an instruction manual do the same thing in English and someone that knew what they were looking at could have built the program out of that just like someone else could look at a gun building instruction manual and build a gun.

Looking at the source now, yes I know how I could build a program to circumvent the Kindle. I have the instructions on how to do that. What I do not have however is a program to circumvent the Kindle. Two different things. I could make one, but that doesn't mean I have one. Therefore this amounts to censorship of someone's right to express themselves through the language they feel comfortable with. It's no different then telling me I can only publish my material in English and not Spanish or telling me I can't publish my ideas at all. A total violation of the First Amendment if this was upheld in court.

[mrzonker]

That is exactly the reason mp3 players took over the gadget world practically overnight (a year or two?) and why e-book readers won't get off the ground for another decade. If people can't take advantage of the content already on their shelves (real or digital shelves), the device is a novelty. The same goes for digital video. I would feel bad for kindle owners, but what did they expect?

[daisy3067]

You are so right ,the consumer is sick and tired of being held to ransom ,again we will turn to open source
if kindle was animal its a panda what we want is a mongrel dog, it jumps the fence ,everybody feeds it pats it, adapts to its environment. if its strong it will survive ...... I will name it 'Fido' wont died o ;-)
ps see already starting the add campaign.

[jtlevin]

I think this is a little different. It is perfectly okay if Amazon keeps the kindle proprietary. But through agreements it is limiting what you can view on it. This has nothing to do with open source. Yes, Amazon uses a priorietary format for its eBooks but I would think you could add programs to support the open ebook (forgot the name) format.

This is not an open source thing - it's an open platform thing. This is sort of what Apple does right? You can only buy the Apple OS/computers from Apple - but they let you put anything you want on it. that's what Amazon needs to do.

[3rdalbum]

My father was looking at getting a Kindle, but I asked him to hold off on his purchase until I'd investigated if the device used DRM and if the book store was available for use in Australia. I haven't yet found out about the second thing, but the Analogue Restrictions Management, (i.e. suing anyone and anything that might threaten Amazon's stranglehold over the use of the device) is distasteful.

I'll investigate the Sony readers now, especially since I like Sony gear. Yes I know that one division of Sony was behind the rootkits on audio CDs, but we'll see. If my father gets a reader, it won't be a Kindle.

[-fjtorres-]

Lost in all the huff-n-puff over book sales is the Library aspect.
Many Libraries in the US offer ebooks for loan in the Mobipocket DRM format (owned by Amazon, btw). The (now widely-publicized) script allows you to borrow library books to read on the kindle so there is a clear, non-piracy application for the PID extractor.
As for those seeking an alternative to the Kindle (not going to debate the wisdom of that) just be aware that Sony is not the only game in town; there is near a dozen other ereaders using the same general technology out there (Cybook3, BeBook, Aztak, iRex, Hanlin, etc) and they all use the lowest-common denominator Mobipocket DRM for book purchases and library loans. Most are, like the Sony, tied to a PC for acquiring and managing books but they also tend to *natively* support multiple ebook formats (LIT, ePub, Mobi, docreader PDB, FB2), as well as document formats like RTF, DOC, PPT, image formats (jpg, png, bmp, cbz, cbr), and even try to display (with the obvious limitations) pretend-paper pdf and dejavu formats.
Most are actually decent products.
If Amazon offends you, give your money to somebody else.

[daisy3067]

here we go again ,i was into kindle but i will hang out for an open source platform you guys will never learn

[gsekse]

The problem is the mentality of people that market HARDWARE and SELL it to a consumer. American consumer will ALWAYS feel that once they BUY a piece of HARDWARE, it is their's to do with as they please. Can you imagine if a gun manufacturer reserved the right to sue a gun owner if they didn't follow their terms of use?? The way to fix this is to LEASE the machine, then you retain ownership and the person buying into this lease will be fully aware of the limitations. It's sort of what happens when someone buys a computer and then Microsoft starts attempting to say what a OWNER can do with it. Until ownership rights are clearly defined at the time of purchase, this problem will continue. Market Dweebs will continue to sell things under the idea that they can still control it after sale.

Amazon's marketing plan reminds me when Edison said that the electric to run a light bulb will be paid by purchasing the light bulb. This leaves large holes for abuse. Now Amazon is trying to prevent the abuse of it's network bandwidth. While I applaud the general idea, I find the marketing plan to be stupid and obviously developed without software engineer input. Typical of marketing Dweebs, they never ask the hard questions. Companies that only listen to their marketing department deserve every failure they get.

So let me get this straight. Amazon sells music with no DRM which I can run on my ipod (hardware provided by Apple which, like Amazon, sells content in their store). Apple has no problem with this. But if I want to take book content that I legally own, with DRM, from anywhere else and load it on the Kindle, Amazon won't allow it.

Nobody in their right mind would buy a Kindle until this changes.

[contentcreator--2008]

All this is telling you is that Amazon is effectively subsidizing the hardware cost of the Kindle, they are protecting their business plan. In a lot of things, you have a choice between paying less up front in return for making later purchases through a service, or paying more up front, and less later on. It's a fundamental business decision. A lot of time people choose lower up front cost --- you've got a credit card, right?

But the moment someone applies this business approach to computers or phones, there's a whole lot of whining about how it should be illegal, you should be able to do what you want, first amendment, blah blah blah. You're just making a contractual choice, and being required to uphold the choice you make, not unilaterally have it both ways. If Amazon only feels it makes sense to offer the subsidized/limited approach, that's their choice, you can choose a different reader.

This stuff isn't hard or more complicated, people just need to get over the idea that they have the right to change contracts by themselves: you're offered a product & service, you either buy it or you don't.

[gsekse]

That is fine for "Content", Mr. Creator, but the fact is that most people believe that when they BUY hardware, it is theirs to do as they wish. That is the problem with Amazon's marketing approach.

How about I tell you car manufacturer to add a terms of use contract to you car??

Don't be a snooty content provider... Engineers have been ripped off more than any musician or author.

[contentcreator--2008]

That's fine if you're buying a brick, but that's not what a Kindle is... it's a hardware/software/service integrated offering. Like I said, you're buying what's offered, which is the integrated bundle. If you don't want it, so what, don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, they'll change the terms, or decide it's not worth doing, but that's their decision, not yours.

"Engineers have been ripped off more than any musician or author." Hence why I argue strongly in favor of preserving the rights of those selling "stuff" to set their terms, take it or leave it, not have users do so unilaterally.

Hysterical example, cars --- something you can't buy or drive till your old enough and undergo mandatory training and licensing, or sell unless you file appropriate paperwork with the state. Want more rules? Try renting one. I think we could all have a laugh thinking of things we'd wish people would have to take a course in order to be able to purchase and use, that might solve a lot of problems.

[mattumanu]

Not to mention car warranties.

[gsekse]

AND thus the confusion, people think they are buying a gadget. The iPhone runs into this same problem, everyone is trying to move away from simply selling a product, ie: brick, computer, TV, etc. They want some sort of continuous return on the "sale". I swear the entitlement crap is amazing. Oh, I made this software or this book or whatever, I should make money forEVAR. Entertainment media, software etc can be sold, but the real money is in making new stuff. What many content producers really want is the big "Star Wars" hit, so they can be billionaires for one lousy idea. Sorta like athletes wanting millions per year, but at least they can say that they have a limited lifespan to produce and work. Lawyer created this mess so that they can make money not fixing it forever. Now, I just got through with a class in my field (real estate appraising) where the suggest turn of events is considering the idea that I should copywrite each appraisal. Hey, it's more legal crap, maybe it can tack another $500 onto your next house purchase, but then you will cry foul and say I'm not worth it, while claiming you are. I'm tired of people wanting to make money with their lawyers.

I repeat, the Amazon market plan for this device is FLAWED, it tries to market hardware as a SALE when in fact it should probably be viewed more as a lease of their software in a convenient container. Least that is what YOU are saying. The hardware is nothing. (ok, give it to me for free) The software isn't free and comes with a terms of use contract that is probably more line of legal crap than lines code in the source code!!

No, I won't buy this device. (I'm an audiobook fan, due to the large amount of driving I do) If I did buy a device, thank goodness I'm clever enough to use open source devices and software.

Oh, and the car manufacturer never tell you how to use the product, only that they won't warranty modifications to their product. As for what the government does, that is a whole different discussion. If FORD issued a "terms of use" contract on the computer software contained in the plastic brick under the hood. Oh, but that's not "CONTENT", that's just stuff made by boring engineer types that don't rate consideration.

Face it, people WILL do whatever they want with the HARDWARE they bought and sc**w the terms of use lawer baloney.

[nicmart]

We need to get rid of the "intellectual property" nonsense that cultivates monopoly and smothers innovation.

http://www.againstmonopoly.org/

[burningbird]

This earlier post at MobileRead likely explains why Amazon responded now, and against MobileRead:


http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41649

There's also a long thread on this at the Kindle owners thread at Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-DCMA-MobileRead-over-kindlepid/forum/Fx2EGRL42MHF15D/Tx3DFQ2RZL6TVH8/1/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8&asin=B00154JDAI

[JWolf42]

Amazon's Kindle 1's PID can be gotten 100% legally using Mobipocket Desktop 6.0 for Windows. The link to get it is http://mason.gmu.edu/~nhoffeld/Mobipocket6.zip

So K1 owners, have at it and have fun and enjoy your now LEGAL PID.

[troppp]

I don't even bother with digital content, but if Amazon begins to roll this way with DRM enforcement, they will lose me as an avid customer in a dozen other sales categories.

[mectron]

Once again the Illegal DRM abused by by big bully to maintain a illegal monopoly.

Only logic action is: total boycott of Amazon as that company has lost ALL credibility and is not legitimate anymore.

[krosafcheg]

Amazon is Adobe 2.0. Remember Adobe vs Elcomsoft and Dmitry Sklyarov with its Adobe Ebook Processor? The authors of such software are better remain anonymous.