And here’s a reminder that if you run a Plex server, there’s an app called Prologue which turns it into a fully fledged audiobook server.

Plex doesn’t natively support things like audiobook bookmarks in m4b files, and tries to just play them straight through like a gigantic 4 hour long music track. But Prologue does support bookmark data. Prologue simply uses Plex’s service to access the files, (because admittedly, Plex is good for letting newbies remotely access their content) and then it ignores Plex’s built-in “lol just play it like music” instructions, and actually parses the files for bookmark data.

As someone who couldn’t get Audiobookshelf to work properly, (something about not being able to access network drives via Docker), Prologue has saved my audiobook library by allowing me to just host it via Plex instead.

Anything similar for ebooks?

Piracy was, is and remains a service problem, as Gabe Newell of Valve (Steam) once stated. Most people are perfectly content to pay a reasonable price to get access to the things they want. But if you make that impossible, they’ll find other options.

Take anime for example: even if you subscribed to every streaming service out there, you still wouldn’t be able to see everything you wanted. Some things aren’t streamable or sold ANYWHERE, or only on a service that’s actively blocked in your region. Which means there is simply no legal way for you at all to get that content.

Music on the other hand solved that dilemma. You can use Spotify, YT Music, Apple Music or a host of other options. You pay a flat fee and you can listen to pretty much every song you want, as often as you want. Nobody’s pirating MP3’s these days, because nobody needs to. It’s now more convenient to just stream it.

I’d really like to see someone do the same for books. An unlimited digital library that lets you download anything you want for a flat subscription fee. I’d pay 10 bucks a month for that for sure. Because that would make it more convenient than pirating is right now, with a more consistent experience.

Its just a bitter taste, thinking about how a few companies can lay words into the mouth of people they did not even say, years after they died

I would rather just have them Ban the books, because then you can see how they are manipulating the information you see.

Does Amazon have permission to change what's in your book though?

Copyright prevents them from making derivative works and if they change your text without your permission, that's a clear copyright violation.

I don't know how licensing deals work with Amazon but I'm guessing if they are doing this en mass, there is probably some provision in their contract.

Source: I sell my "Foundations of Amateur Radio" ebooks on the Kindle store

And thank you for the reminder that I should go get a license before the entire system is so messed up that it wouldn't be possible.

Well or it would be irrelevant because no one would care.

Either way!

Same boat man. 'OK I'll throw a few schmeckles in because the author does need the compensation, but i'm getting the actual book elsewhere.'

Imagine: pirating ebooks but donating money to the author at the same time. Win win.

Yes, but you say it like the Author himself changed it.

In the specific Example, the book is from before 2000 and the author is long dead. That book is a piece of culture now, displaying the writing style from a place in time where it was normal to discriminate against people. By changing a book, regardless of if it was actually amazon or just some manager that bought up the rights for the book, it is manipulating the Past. Amazon should not allow to do such things

This reminds me of a joke....

A new monk arrives at the monastery and is assiged to help the other monks in copying the old texts by hand. When he looks closer, however, he notices that they are copying copies, not the original books. The new monk goes to the head monk to ask him about this. He points out to the head monk that should there be an error in the first copy, that error would be continued in all of the other copies. "We have been copying from the copies for centuries," says the head monk, "however, I must admit you make a very good point, my son." The head monk then goes down to the cellar with one of the copies to check it against the original. Hours pass and no one sees him, so one of the monks decides to go downstairs to look for him. When he arrives he hears loud sobbing coming from the back of the cellar and finds the old head monk leaning over one of the original books crying. "What's wrong," he asks the old monk. "The word is CELEBRATE!" sobs the old monk.

The controversy you pointed out is about someone who was writing factually false information and feeding hate against people who should be covered under the freedom of speech. The ban happened during his life, and not years after he died. Therefore his works were not a peace of gone culture, but hate in the present of time.

If I follow your argumentation, that being that you should allow people write false information feeding hate against specific people just living their life in peace, you should be against censoring Hate speech against Lgbtqia+ people too, or the better question would be: where do you draw the line? At Jews? At queer people?