RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,861
Posts: 5,328,696
Members: 24,554
Currently online: 555
Newest member: Kastrol

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Literature

Trek Literature "...Good words. That's where ideas begin."

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 21 2012, 12:32 AM   #16
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Yeah, I received the same email regarding my kindle. That will be interesting to see how it pans out. .30 to 1.32 a book times how many books I bought for my kindle last year could end up being quite a bit of "free" books, which would be nice.

Amazon didn't mention anything about pulling anything off your e-reader(can they even do that?) like B&N apparently some people are saying here. If they did well... I back things up anyways.

Really, I'm hoping this sets precedent for e-books being cheaper. It's silly at best that most of the new e-books are still at nearly at full novel price when it costs them next to nothing to distribute a freaking file.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 12:40 AM   #17
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

JD wrote: View Post
Huh, it will be interesting to see if this does have any effect on Ebooks in the future.
Penguin and Macmillan elected to go to court. The other three decided not to contest it.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 04:18 PM   #18
timothy
Rear Admiral
 
timothy's Avatar
 
Location: chester's mill, maine
View timothy's Twitter Profile Send a message via Yahoo to timothy
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

So if you get this letter does this mean you will get a b&n e gift card in the future? Even though they never pulled any of your books. Because I have quiet a few star trek books on my nook color
__________________
I am currently reading: star trek the lost era one constant star by david r. George iii

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/honorverse
timothy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 01:59 AM   #19
JWolf
Commodore
 
JWolf's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
My post is not "chock full of wrongness". I don't buy books from B&N, and have a Kindle, not a Nook. My comment was a general comment on the idea that you buy a 'license to read' rather than a copy of the actual content, and was based on the 'full refund' mentioned by GalaxyClass1701.
OK, so maybe I made an assumption based on the idea of a full refund that it implied removal of the books, but given that we've seen that sort of thing before, it's a logical assumption to make.
Yes, it is. B&N is not being sued. The customers who bought Agency eBooks from B&N are not getting a full refund. eBooks are not going to be pulled from WiFi enabled readers (in cases where that is possible). So how is any of what you posted actually correct?
__________________
Jon
JWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 01:59 AM   #20
JWolf
Commodore
 
JWolf's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

timothy wrote: View Post
So if you get this letter does this mean you will get a b&n e gift card in the future? Even though they never pulled any of your books. Because I have quiet a few star trek books on my nook color
You get a credit unless you prefer to get a check.
__________________
Jon
JWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 11:46 AM   #21
Fer
Commander
 
Fer's Avatar
 
Location: Pittsburgh PA area
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Every day when I log on and see this thread in the list, all I can picture is three publisher reps sticking their heads in the door of my local Barnes & Noble and making "Sooo-EEEE!" pig calls.

Yes, I am easily amused.
__________________
http://fersforum.blogspot.com
Fer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 01:00 PM   #22
cardinal biggles
THE ZEPPO
 
cardinal biggles's Avatar
 
Location: potrzebie
Send a message via ICQ to cardinal biggles Send a message via AIM to cardinal biggles Send a message via Yahoo to cardinal biggles
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

JWolf wrote: View Post
timothy wrote: View Post
So if you get this letter does this mean you will get a b&n e gift card in the future? Even though they never pulled any of your books. Because I have quiet a few star trek books on my nook color
You get a credit unless you prefer to get a check.
And for NOOK users, the credit is delivered to you in the form of a B&N electronic gift card, which can then be applied to your NOOK account, unless you notify them that you want a check, or wish to opt out entirely.
cardinal biggles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 01:22 PM   #23
SmoothieX
Vice Admiral
 
SmoothieX's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Fer wrote: View Post
Every day when I log on and see this thread in the list, all I can picture is three publisher reps sticking their heads in the door of my local Barnes & Noble and making "Sooo-EEEE!" pig calls.

Yes, I am easily amused.
You beat me to it, that's the first thing I saw just now. I was wondering if there's a paddock full of pigs out by the loading dock.
SmoothieX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 01:40 PM   #24
Jim Gamma
Rear Admiral
 
Jim Gamma's Avatar
 
Location: London
Send a message via ICQ to Jim Gamma
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

JWolf wrote: View Post
Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
My post is not "chock full of wrongness". I don't buy books from B&N, and have a Kindle, not a Nook. My comment was a general comment on the idea that you buy a 'license to read' rather than a copy of the actual content, and was based on the 'full refund' mentioned by GalaxyClass1701.
OK, so maybe I made an assumption based on the idea of a full refund that it implied removal of the books, but given that we've seen that sort of thing before, it's a logical assumption to make.
Yes, it is. B&N is not being sued. The customers who bought Agency eBooks from B&N are not getting a full refund. eBooks are not going to be pulled from WiFi enabled readers (in cases where that is possible). So how is any of what you posted actually correct?
All of it is, because it was a GENERAL OPINION. As in, a comment based upon the contents of the thread, and events that have happened before, rather than knowledge of this particular situation. At NO POINT did I state that books actually WERE being pulled in this instance, and I'm not the one who mentioned a full refund or B&N being sued first. I have to go on the information that's provided, and based on the information that's provided in the first post, my statements are 100% factual. OK, so maybe I should've made it clearer that I was making a general comment about e-book retailers' policies, but hey, we live and learn.
__________________
My LJ
TrekBBS LJ community
(AKA Jim Gamma)
Jim Gamma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 02:41 PM   #25
OmahaStar
Disrespectful of his betters
 
OmahaStar's Avatar
 
Location: OmahaStar
View OmahaStar's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to OmahaStar Send a message via Yahoo to OmahaStar
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
JWolf wrote: View Post
Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
My post is not "chock full of wrongness". I don't buy books from B&N, and have a Kindle, not a Nook. My comment was a general comment on the idea that you buy a 'license to read' rather than a copy of the actual content, and was based on the 'full refund' mentioned by GalaxyClass1701.
OK, so maybe I made an assumption based on the idea of a full refund that it implied removal of the books, but given that we've seen that sort of thing before, it's a logical assumption to make.
Yes, it is. B&N is not being sued. The customers who bought Agency eBooks from B&N are not getting a full refund. eBooks are not going to be pulled from WiFi enabled readers (in cases where that is possible). So how is any of what you posted actually correct?
All of it is, because it was a GENERAL OPINION. As in, a comment based upon the contents of the thread, and events that have happened before, rather than knowledge of this particular situation. At NO POINT did I state that books actually WERE being pulled in this instance, and I'm not the one who mentioned a full refund or B&N being sued first. I have to go on the information that's provided, and based on the information that's provided in the first post, my statements are 100% factual. OK, so maybe I should've made it clearer that I was making a general comment about e-book retailers' policies, but hey, we live and learn.
I think it's just a misunderstanding. It's an end to Agency Pricing, not e-books. I'll explain.

Amazon was the "king of the mountain" with their Kindle. Then Narns & Noble came along with their Nook. The two competed for the same market, and both ran sales frequently with the price of their e-books. And then the iPad came along. Apple went to the publishers and said "Hey guys, you can set your own price with us." The publishers loved this idea, as it meant more profit for the same thing.

Amazon and Narns & Noble quickly went along with the same scheme, which has been called Agency Pricing. Under that model, the publishers set the price, not the sellers, and the sellers are not allowed to offer discounts on those titles. Another term for this model is price fixing. Which is illegal.

The Attorneys General of several states got together and sued the big five publishers as a group, to stop the price fixing scheme.

The result of that lawsuit is basically this: If you purchased one of the affected titles during the agency model timeframe, you will receive a partial refund. Agency pricing will stop. I've seen both January 1st and February 1st as official end-dates, so I'm not confident which one is correct. But after that, the sellers will set the prices. This means no more $15-$25 for an ebook. They will go back down to their $9.99 max price for new hardcover titles, and $5-6 for others.

The titles you already have aren't going away. If you are concerned about that, then tonight, back up your files. You should be doing that anyway, but make a special effort tonight to back up your ebook files on a cd or your hard drive somewhere.
__________________
"Sorry. Wrong movie, buddy."
OmahaStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 03:20 PM   #26
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
JWolf wrote: View Post
So how is any of what you posted actually correct?
All of it is, because it was a GENERAL OPINION.
Uhh, no, because an opinion based on incorrect data is not correct. It makes no sense to defend an opinion as "right" when it's based on a misunderstanding of the facts.

At NO POINT did I state that books actually WERE being pulled in this instance...
What you said was:

Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
Still not comfortable with them being able to pull stuff off your e-reader - even if you do get your money back.
You were the one who introduced the idea of books being pulled into this thread in the first place, because the first post said absolutely nothing about that. All it said was, " if you bought ebooks dating back to 2010 you will receive a full refund in the form of a gift card." Which was untrue, because any refund is only partial.


I have to go on the information that's provided, and based on the information that's provided in the first post, my statements are 100% factual.
That is a meaningless sentence. First off, conclusions drawn from false information can never be called "factual." They may be honest errors based on being misled by others' counterfactual statements, but they're still not factual. A fact is something that is objectively true, by definition. And second, there was absolutely no information in the first post about books being pulled off of e-readers. That was your own extrapolation beyond what was actually stated.

There's no need to get defensive about this. You were misled, you drew a wrong conclusion, that's all. It happens to the best of us. There's nothing wrong with it, nothing to be ashamed of, so you don't need to defend or justify it. Just abandon the mistaken idea and move on with a better understanding of the truth.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 04:12 PM   #27
OmahaStar
Disrespectful of his betters
 
OmahaStar's Avatar
 
Location: OmahaStar
View OmahaStar's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to OmahaStar Send a message via Yahoo to OmahaStar
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

^ Good gods, could you bash the guy a little more? He may still have a tiny amount of self-esteem left after that post.
__________________
"Sorry. Wrong movie, buddy."
OmahaStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 05:07 PM   #28
Jim Gamma
Rear Admiral
 
Jim Gamma's Avatar
 
Location: London
Send a message via ICQ to Jim Gamma
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Uhh, no, because an opinion based on incorrect data is not correct. It makes no sense to defend an opinion as "right" when it's based on a misunderstanding of the facts.
I have already admitted to not going into this beyond the first post. There was no "misunderstanding" by me, but by the OP. I may have gone off on a tangent with this:
Jim Gamma wrote: View Post
Still not comfortable with them being able to pull stuff off your e-reader - even if you do get your money back.
But at no point did I state that this was what they were doing in this instance. It is, however, what they have done in the past, and based on the scant information available in the OP, I had no way to negate the possibility of this happening again. Also, key phrase: BEING ABLE. As in, "This is a statement about capabilities, not about what's actually happening."



I have to go on the information that's provided, and based on the information that's provided in the first post, my statements are 100% factual.
That is a meaningless sentence. First off, conclusions drawn from false information can never be called "factual." They may be honest errors based on being misled by others' counterfactual statements, but they're still not factual. A fact is something that is objectively true, by definition. And second, there was absolutely no information in the first post about books being pulled off of e-readers. That was your own extrapolation beyond what was actually stated.
OK, so factual is maybe wrong - I should've said "logical". Based on the OP and on previous experience of Amazon and other e-reader manufacturers pulling titles, my deductions could hardly be claimed to be illogical.

Anyway... moving on...

Valeyard: Thank you very much for the explanation you've provided (and for defending me), it's nice to see at least one person here can give corrective information without jumping down people's throats.
__________________
My LJ
TrekBBS LJ community
(AKA Jim Gamma)
Jim Gamma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 05:31 PM   #29
shanejayell
Captain
 
shanejayell's Avatar
 
Location: BC, Canada
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

Sorta related:

http://www.bekkelund.net/2012/10/22/...by-amazon-drm/

Amazon can go into your reader and erase everything?!
__________________
Avatar: Priss Asagiri, Bubblegum Crisis
shanejayell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 05:52 PM   #30
OmahaStar
Disrespectful of his betters
 
OmahaStar's Avatar
 
Location: OmahaStar
View OmahaStar's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to OmahaStar Send a message via Yahoo to OmahaStar
Re: Barnes and Noble Suied by three publishers.

shanejayell wrote: View Post
Sorta related:

http://www.bekkelund.net/2012/10/22/...by-amazon-drm/

Amazon can go into your reader and erase everything?!
Yes, they can. And they have in the past. A few years ago, they "discovered" that they did not have the right to sell the book 1984. Instead of sending out an email to customers who had purchased it, they simply went in and deleted the file from the customers' Kindles. It took at least a few days before they did any kind of press release or let people know what happened, and then it was only after customers complained publically. They offered a credit of whatever amount the customers had paid. That was it.

And ironic, considering what title it was.

That's why at least once a week, I back up any ebooks I've purchased. Since we're not actually buying anything, we are just getting a temporary license that can be revoked at any time. Which only feeds into the "ebooks are too expensive" school of thought.
__________________
"Sorry. Wrong movie, buddy."
OmahaStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.