1984.jpg

In a truly Orwellian twist, a Michigan teenager named Justin Gawronski is launching a class-action lawsuit against Amazon for deleting the novel 1984 from his Kindle. It seems Justin had been taking notes, as students are advised to do, but when the book disappeared, he argues, his notes became irrelevant.

CBC News reports:

Justin Gawronski took copious notes using the Kindle that were linked to particular passages in the book, the court document says, and while those notes are still accessible, they are useless without the passages they reference.

Amazon has apologized for remotely deleting copies of 1984 and another Orwell novel, Animal Farm, in mid-July without informing customers.

While Amazon "said publicly that it had deleted the books because they were added to its catalogue by a third party who did not have the rights to the book," the fact is the customers who had purchased the book had no say in the matter, and no warning.

My book vs. kindle post on SFgate yesterday sparked a lively debate between paper-loving Luddites and Kindle proponents. Those who can't foresee giving up the old-fashioned book for its electronic counterpart primarily cite the former's physicality--the paper, the smell, the heft--not to mention its comparatively low cost.

While I know there are many avid Kindle fans out there, all of whom have their own good reasons for embracing the technology, the 1984 snafu just gives me another reason to love my battered old books: no one can read my notes or see what I've underlined. And if the publisher wants the book back, they have to come for it.

The lovable guys at Green Apple have posted another video in their Book vs. Kindle series, this one on the subject of sharing. View the video here.

 (Thanks to Chet Farmer at Miscellaneous Heathen for alerting me to Amazon's remote deletion capabilities yesterday.