alt Hacker NewsThe linked article is about Amazon's having realized they had no right to sell the books they thought they had sold and reversing the transaction, not revoking a license to something they thought they had licensed to you.
You seem to be missing the importance of that nuance.
Sigh.
OK:
https://goodereader.com/blog/kindle/amazon-changes-licensing...
"Amazon has revised the text when purchasing a Kindle e-book on its online store. You do not own the book you bought but are licensing it. It used to say “By clicking on above button, you agree to Amazon’s Kindle Store Terms of Use.”"
...
"This is not a policy shift from Amazon for the US; they are more upfront about it now. Amazon has always licensed the digital content to users, so anything purchased does not mean the user owns it, they just bought a license"
As the article points out, the change in verbiage was because of a new California requirement that this should be made explicit. It was always a license. They merely changed the verbiage on the button to conform to state rules.
Edit: I have to say, after a bunch of rather pointless arguments today and yesterday on HN, it disappoints me that the average commenter is quick to jump to unsubstantiated conclusions. Both times the facts were trivial to lookup.
Not the HN of yore.