Can Amazon revert a license without giving any explanation?

[Antilogic]

I'd have to defer to an actual lawyer (paging JR!), but in all the decisions I have read on contract disputes and the like, it's always a single judge or a panel of judges that jointly determine the opinion of the court on the case. Higher level courts (i.e appeals courts and the supreme court) do not have juries because the facts are already established (which is what the second half of that clause means).

I suspect that if the facts aren't in question, then there would not be a jury trial and thus that excerpt of the 7th Amendment would not apply.

 

[Hehehe]

Can they? Sure. Should they be able to? Not in my opinion.

I think what may have happened is that someone stole her credit card info and used it on amazon.co.uk, then that account got banned and they connected it to her other account.

Anyway, this incident does raise some concern over digital goods. There are two things that grind my gears: EULAs and changing the terms retroactively. EULAs are simply too long to read. Companies copy paste it from other programs as a some sort legal protect-from-everything. Second, changing the terms retroactively: to use steam as an example, let's say you buy some games from them. If they update their EULA (to take features or your legal rights away, for example, as they have done) you either have to agree to it or you lose all your games. I know I (probably) agreed to it when I bought those games but I still don't think it is fair.

Now I suppose those things don't matter so much because any contract that contradicts the Finnish law is automatically null, meaning that one cannot give up one's legal rights. But still it bothers me, so much actually that I have considered making a complaint to get some clarification to my rights as a customer. Not sure what good it would do though, even if they rule in my favor there's no guarantee Steam will comply.

EDIT: by complaint I mean complaining to the Finnish consumer rights representative. But since I doubt that will do anything, does anyone know if EU has something similar?

 

[LucyDuke]

There is an update: after massive response in internet about Linn's case, her account has been reopened.

The PR damage is done.

 

[Agent327]

The question basically provides its own answer.

But one might consider that e-commerce is as yet seriously lacking in (enforcable) regulations.

 

[Yeekim]

EDIT: by complaint I mean complaining to the Finnish consumer rights representative. But since I doubt that will do anything, does anyone know if EU has something similar?

Edit: nvm

 

[Tecknojock]

The EU court of justice did extend the right of first sale to digitally purchased software earlier this year by declaring the selling of the license a transfer of property. Granted this ruling uses software, but I'd be willing to bet it would be extended to other digital items as well.

The Ruling

Where the copyright holder makes available to his customer a copy – tangible or intangible – and at the same time concludes, in return form payment of a fee, a license agreement granting the customer the right to use that copy for an unlimited period, that rightholder sells the copy to the customer and thus exhausts his exclusive distribution right. Such a transaction involves a transfer of the right of ownership of the copy.

 

[Arakhor]

That could be tricky for Valve or Amazon if they tried to protect those shenanigans in an EU court.

 

[GoodGame]

This kind of thing makes my blood boil. You're absolutely right that this is total BS. You're not really buying anything: you're just paying for the right to borrow it. And they can take it back whenever they want, for whatever reason they want. I think if this was made clearer, the price people would be willing to pay would fall rather dramatically.

One is in fact paying for a right to a license to an IP, at least in terms of US law. Obviously the interpretations of copyright, user agreements, and the strength of a user agreement will depend upon the underlying laws of the local jurisdiction.

I'm curious what the exact UK law says on the subject, including the strength of an Amazon agreement in the UK.


Example of the US Steam agreement

2. LICENSES

A. License Terms.

Steam and your Subscription(s) require the automatic download and installation of Software onto your computer. Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a limited, terminable, non-exclusive license and right to use the Software for your personal use in accordance with this Agreement, including the Subscription Terms. The Software is licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Software. To make use of the Software, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet.
...
E. Ownership.

All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Software and any and all copies thereof, are owned by Valve US and/or its or its affiliates' licensors. All rights are reserved, except as expressly stated herein. The Software is protected by copyright laws, international copyright treaties and conventions and other laws. The Software contains certain licensed materials and Valve's and its affiliates' licensors may protect their rights in the event of any violation of this Agreement.

under conduct and cheating:

Steam and the Software may include functionality designed to identify software or hardware processes or functionality (“Cheats&#8221 that may give a player an unfair competitive advantage when playing multiplayer versions of any Software or modifications thereof. You agree that you will not create or assist third parties in any way to create Cheats. You agree that you will not directly or indirectly disable, circumvent, or otherwise interfere with the operation of software designed to prevent or report the use of Cheats. You acknowledge and agree that either Valve or any online multiplayer host may refuse to allow you to participate in certain online multiplayer games if you use Cheats in connection with Steam or the Software. Further, you acknowledge and agree that an online multiplayer host may report your use of Cheats to Valve, and Valve may communicate your history of use of Cheats to other online multiplayer hosts for Software. Valve may terminate your Account or a particular Subscription for any conduct or activity that Valve believes is illegal, constitutes a Cheat, or which otherwise negatively affects the enjoyment of Steam by other Subscribers. You acknowledge that Valve is not required to provide you notice before terminating your Subscriptions(s) and/or Account, but it may choose to do so.

So even Valve will basically do what Amazon did, if they warrant it. Makes you think twice about whether or not to buy that retail box version or not, no?

You also agree to give up your right to use Steam, including limiting yourself to binding arbitration, on an individual basis.
So in effect Valve could claim it believes you behaved illegally, lock your account, and then ignore your pleas for arbitration (they do offer a very specific route and terms for arbitration, which is cool, if they are actually serviceable). Even if you managed a massively popular out-cry against Steam, the resolutions would only be taken care of on an individual basis. So possibly, Steam can poop all over you and tell you to "stick it" while you try to get the arbitration service to pay attention to you, if that really fit their business plan one day.

 

[Zelig]

DRM be damned: how to protect your Amazon e-books from being deleted

 

[Tecknojock]

I'm curious what the exact UK law says on the subject, including the strength of an Amazon agreement in the UK.

Well, the UK is part of the EU, so wouldn't they be subject to the ruling I posted earlier?

 

[Mise]

BTW, Amazon didn't actually erase her books remotely. She sent it in to get repaired, and, while being repaired, her account was suspended. I think, when she got her kindle back, it was wiped during the repair process, but whereas normally you can just redownload the books, in this case, as her account was suspended, she couldn't, and had no access to any of the books she bought on any of her devices. The link I posted earlier had another link at the bottom that clarified this.

 

[holy king]

This kind of thing makes my blood boil. You're absolutely right that this is total BS. You're not really buying anything: you're just paying for the right to borrow it. And they can take it back whenever they want, for whatever reason they want. I think if this was made clearer, the price people would be willing to pay would fall rather dramatically.

yeah, paying for data is stupid.

 

[Hehehe]

The EU court of justice did extend the right of first sale to digitally purchased software earlier this year by declaring the selling of the license a transfer of property. Granted this ruling uses software, but I'd be willing to bet it would be extended to other digital items as well.

The Ruling

The "unlimited period" part is interesting, but I daresay that, in practice, the ruling means that if you try and sell your license (Steam account, for example), they won't sue you.

So even Valve will basically do what Amazon did, if they warrant it. Makes you think twice about whether or not to buy that retail box version or not, no?

A lot of retail versions today require Steam.

You also agree to give up your right to use Steam, including limiting yourself to binding arbitration, on an individual basis.
So in effect Valve could claim it believes you behaved illegally, lock your account, and then ignore your pleas for arbitration (they do offer a very specific route and terms for arbitration, which is cool, if they are actually serviceable). Even if you managed a massively popular out-cry against Steam, the resolutions would only be taken care of on an individual basis. So possibly, Steam can poop all over you and tell you to "stick it" while you try to get the arbitration service to pay attention to you, if that really fit their business plan one day.

I admit I didn't read the EULA, but from what I understand it is pretty much a license to do anything they want (as the quotes you provided seem to suggest). I don't have a problem with Steam's business practices, it's just the legal stuff that makes me a bit uneasy. This whole digital goods market is relatively new, so I believe we will get consumer rights legislation up to speed some day.

 

[Tecknojock]

The "unlimited period" part is interesting, but I daresay that, in practice, the ruling means that if you try and sell your license (Steam account, for example), they won't sue you.

But, the fact that it was declared a transfer of rights means that you actually own it, not that you are renting it (or so it reads to me anyways). This should set a precedence that could easily extend a myriad of consumer rights including the inability for Amazon to revoke it as they did.

 

[warpus]

If this happened to me I would just do chargebacks on my kindle and all e-books purchased through Amazon.

Then if they want their money back they can deal with my bank.

Potential issue with my solution: Is there a time limit on when you can do a cc chargeback?

 

[Antilogic]

BTW, Amazon didn't actually erase her books remotely. She sent it in to get repaired, and, while being repaired, her account was suspended. I think, when she got her kindle back, it was wiped during the repair process, but whereas normally you can just redownload the books, in this case, as her account was suspended, she couldn't, and had no access to any of the books she bought on any of her devices. The link I posted earlier had another link at the bottom that clarified this.

You gotta wonder how she was acting illegally on her account while freakin' Amazon had the Kindle in their possession.

If this happened to me I would just do chargebacks on my kindle and all e-books purchased through Amazon.

Then if they want their money back they can deal with my bank.

Potential issue with my solution: Is there a time limit on when you can do a cc chargeback?

Generally yes, and depending on the card it's usually within a couple months (i.e. between when you get your statement with the charge on it and the next statement or two).

Hers were purchased over the course of years in which case all but the last few would likely be out of the dispute range.

 

[Zelig]

Potential issue with my solution: Is there a time limit on when you can do a cc chargeback?

Like 45 days or somesuch, depending on when your statement.

 

[Mise]

@antilogic: it was 2nd hand, and the theory is that the person she bought it from was doing illegal things.

 

[Antilogic]

@antilogic: it was 2nd hand, and the theory is that the person she bought it from was doing illegal things.

The Kindle, or the account? I thought she made the account in her own name.

 

[Mise]

The account was in her own name, and she transferred the kindle to her own account when she bought it 2nd hand. But the previous owner must have been doing bad things with their own account. Amazon must have believed that the previous owner simply opened a new account with a different name and linked their kindle to it.