UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion


Comments Showing 1-12 of 12 (12 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Patti (baconater) (goldengreene) | 61757 comments Do you think this counts as censorship?

Michael Cargill Cargill (michaelcargill) | 2998 comments Not really. The publisher requested it to be withdrawn and Amazon are free to stock whatever they like.

There is nothing preventing the book from being made available for free elsewhere.

message 3: by Will (new)

Will Once (willonce) | 4053 comments Personally, I do think that it is censorship. Not only has the book been withdrawn from Amazon but officials in British Columbia are trying to prevent the book from being published elsewhere.

But I have to say that this is an example of "good" censorship. I don't believe that anyone has a right to publish anything. There are, and ought to be, rules and laws preventing the publication of material which is obscene or otherwise unacceptable.

Allowing a serial killer to publish his memoirs? Ah no. Sorry, but no. As much as I believe in the freedom of expression, that is a step too far.

message 4: by David (new)

David Staniforth (davidstaniforth) | 7939 comments I think it counts as high profile advertising. Nothing as potent as telling people they can't for making them want to.

Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo) (snibborg) | 9052 comments In the UK it is illegal for anyone convicted of a crime to profit from that crime. Other convicted criminals have tried to do this and failed.

G J (Gaff to my friends) Reilly | 1901 comments It is censorship, but I agree with Will. I think it's necessary in this case.

message 7: by Patti (baconater) (last edited Feb 23, 2016 01:12AM) (new)

Patti (baconater) (goldengreene) | 61757 comments Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "In the UK it is illegal for anyone convicted of a crime to profit from that crime. Other convicted criminals have tried to do this and failed."

But would he be profiting from his crimes or using self publishing to argue his innocence? What if he gave the info to someone else to publish?

By the way, I don't know anything about the specifics of this case. I'm just using it as an example.

We've seen several cases being examined in the media lately. Are Serial or Making of a Murderer okay because 'journalists' are presenting the argument?

message 8: by Anita (new)

Anita | 3758 comments I think it's the right thing to do, whatever you want to call it.

message 9: by Lisa (last edited Feb 23, 2016 02:43AM) (new)

Lisa Marie Gabriel (lisamariegabriel) | 1091 comments If they are going to publish such books I think they should use the profits to give to the victims' families and/or to provide help and education to women who might be vulnerable to serial killers.

message 10: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 37 comments Sounds like Patti has a point.
It's obviously a controversial issue. As I understand from the article, the book is not about murders and propagation of his way, but about him being framed by the police. Can be a libelous (towards police) and improper content, but nothing too extreme it seems; and profits, if any, can go to families through imposing liens on his royalties. If it was published under his defense attorney name, no one would probably object. If the book would be banned though from public concerns or those of victims families, I can understand.
For the sake of debate should The Wolf of Wall Street be allowed or Mien Kampf?

message 12: by Elle (new)

Elle (louiselesley) | 7913 comments I don't think people like him should profit of things like this (I agree with the UK laws) but I'm not gonna lie, I would be interested in reading them.

back to top