Amazon has updated its purchasing terms for Kindle e-books in the United States to clarify that customers are acquiring a license to the content, not ownership. The new statement reads: “By placing your order, you’re purchasing a license to the content and agree to the Kindle Store Terms of Use.” This update is specific to U.S. customers; international users continue to see the previous wording, but the message is the same: You don’t own it; we are only letting you use it.
Starting February 26, 2025, Amazon will discontinue the “Download & Transfer via USB” feature for Kindle devices. This means users can no longer download Kindle books directly to their computers for manual transfer, as the access to purchased content will now depend entirely on Amazon’s cloud infrastructure. This change points out a subtle truth about ownership and reinforces a simple fact: It isn’t yours if someone else can take it away.
This is not just an Amazon issue but applies to all content and materials in our current digital era. Your favorite songs and albums on your streaming app cannot be accessed without an internet connection. They limit the number of devices you can listen from, and they insert ads unless you pay them a monthly fee. Gone are the days of records, tapes, and CDs having the freedom to listen however you want, resell, or even give it away to a friend.
What does it mean to own something? Ownership is typically understood as the act or state of possessing something. In this case, we clearly possess the content, but it can be altered or taken away from us at any time. That is not true ownership. Oxford states ownership is defined as “The exclusive right to use, possess, and dispose of property”. So exclusivity is required in ownership.
What about other intangible digital items such as money or identity? You possess your name or handle on social media or email. That is you, it is your online likeness, persona, and content that you created. You cannot have two people with the same name or handle, and that exclusivity is enforced by a password on the account, but that account can be locked, banned, or deleted at any time by the decisions of Facebook or X. What about that money in your bank account? You possess it, and you have legal rights to it, but banks freeze accounts, and governments seize funds all the time. That is not true ownership.
So I ask again: What does it mean to own something? It is not enough to possess it; having exclusivity or even legal rights is not enough. To truly own something, you alone must be able to enforce that possession and exclusivity. In the physical world, enforcement largely comes down to coercion and the threat or actual use of violence. The eviction notice from the sheriff’s department, the armed guards in front of a vault, the redrawing of borders after a war. In the digital domain, encryption serves this purpose and, at the same time, removes the need for violence by making force ineffective. It creates ownership that cannot be overridden by violence. No amount of physical force can break strong cryptography. A government can seize a server, and a company can shut down an account, but if data is encrypted and the key is private, the information remains inaccessible. The only way to access encrypted assets is through consent.
Encryption doesn’t just protect digital ownership; it changes the very nature of power. It removes violence from the equation. That’s why it’s so disruptive.
Digital signing in encrypted systems is how you prove ownership and control in the digital world. PGP lets you sign messages and files, proving they came from you and haven’t been altered. Nostr, a decentralized social media protocol, works the same way. Your posts and identity are tied to your private key, not a company that can ban or delete you. Bitcoin exemplifies this principle. Controlling your private keys means only you can access and manage your funds. When you sign a Bitcoin transaction, only you can access and move your money. No bank can freeze it, no government can seize it without your key. True ownership is about having the power to enforce that ownership.
The Bitcoin axiom “Not your keys, not your coins” comes to mind. “Not your keys, not your coins” means if you don’t control the private keys to your Bitcoin, you don’t own it. When you keep Bitcoin on an exchange, the exchange holds the keys, not you. They can freeze your account, limit withdrawals, or even lose your funds. Brokerage accounts and retirement accounts with Bitcoin ETFs can be frozen or seized the same as any bank account. True ownership means holding your keys because only then do you have full control over your money, identity, and property.
The shift from physical to digital has made access easier but ownership murky. Whether it’s books, music, identity, or money, just having possession is an illusion of ownership. Companies can revoke access, governments can seize funds, and platforms can erase identities, but encryption changes that. Ownership becomes enforceable, not by laws, a corporation, or an institution, but by math. If you want true digital ownership, the rule is simple: control your keys, or someone else is the true owner.
This is a guest post by Will Jager. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
