Slashdot Mirror
Librarian Attacks Amazon's Kindle Lending Program
destinyland writes "A California librarian is urging librarians to complain to Amazon over issues with privacy and advertising in Amazon's new Kindle ebook lending program for libraries. 'In our greedy attempt to get content into our users' hands, we have failed to uphold the highest principle of our profession, which is intellectual freedom,' she argues in a 10-minute video. (Read the transcript here). Amazon keeps your history of reading library ebooks on their corporate servers, 'so it's an instant violation of all of our privacy policies. And we haven't told people that, and we need to tell people that.' And while many libraries have strict policies against endorsing a particular product, the check-out process concludes on Amazon.com with a pitch urging library patrons to purchase more Amazon books — and there's even book-buying plugs in their 'due date' reminders."
First Post
I'm confused as to how it makes sense for Amazon to work with libraries if they cant even advertise.
The libraries also keep a record of who has checked out what books. Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to send you a notice saying you have overdue books.
They also are subject to FISA warrants (the "we can't tell you if your history has been subpoenaed") for your entire borrowing history.
I think this librarian is just upset because he/she is realizing how irrelevant the idea of a library is anymore. Seriously, when was the last time any of you actually used a library?
It might not be a bad idea for Amazon to work out a similar plan: simply destroy the record once the book is returned. They might have to burn some ad records as well though, since I'm sure they're offering the book for sale, and it would be easy to track that if they got subpoenaed. My guess is that is where Amazon would balk.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
People don't care. They just don't. As long as they can consume something faster and cheaper, they will. Self respect doesn't even into the equation. Welcome to Idiocracy.
I don't respond to AC's.
Prattlings from a worker in yet another doomed profession. I have several friends who work at libraries, and I'm constantly amazed at their delusions of relevance. More and more money spent acquiring multiple copies of best sellers rather than expanding the breadth of the library. Money wasted on video games and popular DVDs. A single years' budget could buy everyone in my city one of the subsidized Kindles. Lease the real estate to purchase e-books for lending. Instead, they're expanding the number of libraries but keeping the budget the same, so it'll mean more of the pie going for facilities and salaries and less on content.
Amazon keeps your history of reading library ebooks on their corporate servers, 'so it's an instant violation of all of our privacy policies.
Doesn't the library keep a record of my reading history that is accessible by the gov'ment under the "patriot" act? How is this any worse? At least Amazon can do something positive with the data and make recommendations of books I might like...
Have gnu, will travel.
Does it really surprise anyone? Amazon is the company that went and deleted people's books AFTER they were paid for and amazon will do what it takes to make a dollar. Libraries and Amazon really don't have the same mission (and shouldn't) so why is this any surprise.
"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
Well, people fought player pianos and Edison phonographs because they felt it would put human piano players out of business. And the movie studios famously fought VHS tapes tooth-and-nail, nearly denying themselves many many billions of dollars in revenues. Isn't every new technology met with this kind of dissension, especially by the status quo? And surely libraries - most libraries, anyway - store the book-lending habits of its patrons on a server somewhere? Of course they don't try to sell us anything, but they can certainly mine this information if they choose.
“The American Library Association (ALA) opposes any use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of knowledge and information or to intimidate individuals exercising free inquiryALA considers that sections of the USA PATRIOT ACT are a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users.” - From the ALA website.
“The searches of some records kept by libraries and bookstores were authorized in an obscure provision of the USA Patriot Act, quietly approved by Congress six weeks after Sept. 11. The act, passed virtually without hearings or debate, allowed a variety of new federal surveillance measures, including clandestine searches of homes and expanded monitoring of telephones and the Internet. Section 215 gave the FBI authority to obtain library and bookstore records and a wide range of other documents during investigations of international terrorism or secret intelligence activities.”
“Under the Patriot Act, law-enforcement officials must still back up their library-search requests with a warrant from a court. But that court meets in secret to hear the FBI’s reasons for suspicion, critics say, and legal standards for obtaining warrants are not as tough as standards for traditional search warrants.”
Easier for the FBI to get the info from Amazon.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
All your base are belong to us
Orange County (Florida) libraries keep your entire history, but at least online you can delete specific books from your history and opt out.
Whether or not they store that somewhere else, I don't know.
I don't know if Amazon has an opt-out or not.
Hi - I think a lot of people here are focusing more on Librarian In Black's concern of the "Buy Now" buttons - when you should be concerned about your privacy. First, I get why she is annoyed by the "Buy Now" button. Libraries do not wish to "endorse" a particular service or product over another - and the "Buy Now" button gives the sense that "This Library supports Amazon" over another bookseller.
As for the privacy concerns, I've noticed a lot of comments on "Well, don't libraries give up those records with the PATRIOT act anyway?" When the PATRIOT act was enacted, libraries in the US scrambled to protect the rights of their users and the majority of them only have a record of who has what item out at that time - they do not have a record of what you returned.
And of course, there are lots who are saying "Libraries, bah - NOT RELEVANT." And I'm sure that is true for many of you; however, the library is more than books. Libraries provide a space for people to gather, they provide free internet to those who cannot afford it, they provide lessons on various computer programs, storytimes for children, etc. I am in an academic college library, and the majority of my students cannot afford their textbooks, let alone a computer for them to use. Please remember, you are probably viewing this article from your own computer - there are still a lot of people out there who don't have that luxury. Libraries help people with research, and despite what everyone thinks - not everything is found via Google. Perhaps Rush Limbaugh could have used a librarian / library when he made those horrible remarks about the LRA.
I think I know which profession to look for women in, we'll get along just fine!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
can attest, those library cops can track you down decades later.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
The inconsistency in the Slashdot ethos about information is stunning. The library is THE PLACE that has kept information free in American society and when a librarian stands up for everyone in trying to a) protect privacy and b) give people access to information without bias, y'all complain?
Where else can you, within current copyright law, read an entire book for free? Get it sent to your local library? Read an eBook for free? Take your kids and let them read and play in a special area for them? Take those books home, for free?
Libraries are a bastion for the freedom of information in a society with umpteen million commercial pressures to suppress it. These librarians are the shit.
If I agree with her, and her library has a copy of the book I want, I will read it in hard copy. If I disagree with her, I will resent that she is advocating for all libraries to take this choice from me... Even when they don't HAVE a copy of the book I want to read in hard copy.
Actually, this is the only Kindle program I really like. Participating libraries can provide something they may not HAVE a copy of (saving small libraries). And if they DO have the hard paper copy, I'd probably prefer it anyway, so what's the harm?
If multiple people read a book, the positive environmental impact of reuse offsets the cost of printing, and beats the Kindle. But if it's an obscure book that only I want to read, it's better for me to read it on a borrowed Kindle. Environmental cost of production of the laptop or Kindle is only offset after thousands of reads (obviously Amazon's goal), but the average years of use of new electronic gadgets makes that milestone, per Kindle, unlikely in a single-kindle-owner-user basis.
The librarian tirade seems to say this should not even be attempted on a trial basis. What does it amount to, 1% of library readership? If it increases the number of people who go to the library, she should dance a jig on Kindle's behalf.
Gently reply
By scanning my library card a program will retrieve all the books I've checked out from a server. They don't tell me where the server is and if I can get access to it to monitor how my information is being treated. The library has a ton of advertisements in it for books and newspapers and more. I'm really confused what her point is, all the kindle has done is shrunken down the library into a hand held model, everything this library is complaining about happens in the library system. I think she's just worried of losing a job because a little embedded system can do her job more effectively.
They don't mess around.
Talking too loudly? SHHHH!
Demanding the records of a librarian patron? STFU!
every brick and mortar library i have ever visited also kept my reading history on file; high school library, uni library, city library, state library - all of them. i could even browse it from one of their dumb-terminals right there on the library desk. so... what is their real argument? oh yeah - easier than driving to a real library.
Rush Limbaugh's fact checker has the easiest job in the world.
Not that I like much about Franken's poltics either, but he is a pretty good comedian.
Never assume the owner of the medium you are using can't access your information on it. The phone company can hear your phone calls. Your ISP can monitor your traffic. Your email server can read your email. Your game server can read your private chats. Youtube can read your private youtube messages. Forum owners can read private forum messages.
And yes, corporations/companies/individuals know your history of buying from them.
The only way to avoid it is to one day need that information; then it probably can't be found.
I can call it up. I forgot i had read some of those books.
You get to give something away for free instead of paying for books and amazon gets a little advertisement .... big deal. And if this spins out of control and people follow these links and BUY BOOKS then it keeps their lust for reading alive and keeps people interested in even having libraries at all. As for keeping lists of books that were checked out ... my county library does this unless you specifically check a box on your account that you want them not to. I think you'll find that this is
common practice in many libraries today.
Librarians are the proto-geeks, proto-DBAs, and proto-sysadmins.
Not to mention most are female, quite a few single, and quite a few good looking. Heck, there is even a subset where all 3 attributes apply!
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
We noticed you recently checked out a copy of The Anarchists Cook Book;
You May Also Be Interested In: A lengthy term as a political prisoner.
Others are Reading: The Writing on the Wall.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
> In our greedy attempt to get content into our users' hands
Um, wait I have this. Greedy attempt... get content in other's hands... greedy... others... greedy, ... access to content for others... greedy...
I got nuthin'. Can someone help me on this?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I don't get it...regional libraries in Michigan have been offering books in epub format, for "check out" for awhile now. Process works great on nooks. So make a choice and stop whining (I still haven't found the word whinging in the dictionary). Oh...and no advertising to go buy what you already have checked out. If my parents bought every book they ever read or checked out from a library they'd be living in their garage because the house would be ink and paper fire hazard...
Libraries should keep using an open standard format for books.
An e-book reader shouldn't dictate new standards just because it's relatively popular.
Amazon's Kindle is pretty much the only e-book reader that can't read EPUB files. For obvious reasons, they'd rather keep you in their own shop. Screw them!
I can definitely agree with this librarian, for many reasons. First, I have to admit I don't really like Amazon's policies on their ebook format. First the format is proprietary when the rest of the world is ePub, and they have had issues taking books away that you already bought due to various reasons. So that's my personal gripe with Amazon and their ebook store.
As for the librarian, I see her concerns and agree about the privacy issues, along side this, the issue regarding the advertisements. There's a big difference with Amazon and these two things that make Amazon more money off the back of a great and free service that are libraries give us each day. The libraries are pay a lot of money that they can barely afford from Amazon, to support a their popular device. In return Amazon is soliciting advertisements, keeping track of data, and making money over and over again on a institution that is desperately suffering in this digital day in age.
I think they should get rid of Amazon honestly, if Amazon isn't going to change their ways and their harsh way of treating a great service that our local libraries grant us.
"Not tonight dear - I'm reading a book."
Don't get too excited.
Does anyone know what the contract between the Libraries and Overdrive is? Any librarian out there know this? This is the key component as to what information Amazon gets from its contract with Overdrive as Overdrive could not pass onto Amazon anything it's contractually required to protect. Perhaps all Amazon gets out of its deal with Overdrive is the button about buying the book if the book's reader liked the book and wanted to own it. This should be easy to ascertain unless the libraries have a "non disclosure agreement with Overdrive".
I work in a college Library. Yes our system tracks what you CURRENTLY have out, that's obviously needed. It does not store a history of what you've had once those books are returned. However, one thing it does store is the last patron to have a book. This is needed, for example, in case a book comes back damaged and it's not caught on check-in. It's then possible to create a list of books where that person is the last patron to have them, but depending on turn over, this list could be quite short.
The whole concept of borrowing e-books from a library is really insane. I suspect it will look even more stupid in 10 years once we have given up trying to objectify digital media to support outdated business models.
That is what your little kids will be saying in a few years.
Be seeing you...
We need a national library policy that puts the control back into the hands of the libraries and not the corporations. It would be difficult to do without claims that it would just be an easy means to copy media but you can do that already so it really isn't issue outside of the perceived threat. Basically, the government needs to enforce mandatory licensing deals for all content produced for libraries but put just enough restrictions on the content to not kill commercial sales or overwhelm libraries. I don't know how it could be done but I'm sure there are plenty of smart people (including many librarians) that could provide some workable solutions. I think it is silly that a library's digital content is distributed and managed in much the same way as if it were paper content. In my opinion, the library should get a copy of every new book in digital form with no DRM and be allowed to lend it to as many people as they see fit. Allow the librarians to determine their own policies and I bet you'll find that they are more than fair.
Silly Nyder... Libraries have been around for thousands of years! They've survived the changes as info moved from stone tablets to papyrus, from quill pens to printing presses, from paper to digital, from books to radio & TV, from mainframes to hand-held devices. They'll continue to adapt. Only small-minded people limit their possibilities.