Publishers Lunch‘s Michael Cader has commented in depth on Amazon’s yanking of unauthorized uploads of two George Orwell books, 1984 and Animal Farm. Cader’s views are particularly cogent. In fact I’ve seen a lot of cogent commentary. What I haven’t seen is a contrarian viewpoint defending Amazon. Amazon needs defending? Read on.

Despite all the e-ink spilled over Amazon’s seemingly high-handed act of reaching into everyone’s Kindle and vaporizing their Orwells, nobody seems to be trying to understand Amazon’s motivation let alone support it. Amazon certainly didn’t help by failing to apologize or even explain, thus turning a heavy-handed gaffe into a public relations black eye. Nevertheless, we owe it to Amazon to imagine what they – or their lawyers – might have been thinking when they sent down the order to zap the Orwells.

I said lawyers and that’s the key. If I were Mr. Amazon (hmm, who could that be?) I would be gravely concerned about my company’s liability for infringing on someone else’s copyright. Furthermore I would be concerned that those who purchased the copyrighted work from my website might be liable as well, and my actions – simply offering the books for sale – might be responsible for my customers getting sued. Were these infringements inadvertent? Sure. Would that exculpate you and me from a legal action brought by an aggrieved copyright owner? Not necessarily. Ignorance of the law has never shielded the innocent from being drawn into lawsuits. Would you like to be named as a John Doe in an infringement suit? I don’t think so. Would I (Mr. Amazon, that is) want to show good faith to the copyright owners by recalling the unauthorized product? My mouthpieces say Yeah, do it now and apologize later.

I haven’t seen the communications between Amazon and Kindle owners informing them their books had been yanked, but had Amazon emailed customers saying “We’re doing this for your own good so you don’t get sued,” it might have gone far to snatch some good will from the jaws of intense embarrassment. As it was, Amazon’s conduct was lead-footed clumsy, and offering credit towards another purchase just didn’t make up for the sense of violation most Kindlelach felt when they woke up to discover their Orwells had vanished. It’s still not too late for an explanation (I’ve just given them one) and apology.

There. I’ve defended Amazon. But it was damn hard work. Can I go back to picking on them?

Richard Curtis