What happened? The details are fuzzy, but apparently, a publisher that supplied Amazon (AMZN) with two George Orwell titles has decided that it doesn’t want to sell them via Amazon anymore. So away they went.

Readers described their experiences at this Amazon forum, and one of them included this note she said she received from Amazon customer service explaining what happened:

The Kindle edition books Animal Farm by George Orwell. Published by MobileReference (mobi) & Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984) by George Orwell. Published by MobileReference (mobi) were removed from the Kindle store and are no longer available for purchase. When this occured, your purchases were automatically refunded. You can still locate the books in the Kindle store, but each has a status of not yet available. Although a rarity, publishers can decide to pull their content from the Kindle store.

Normally, I’m pretty cavalier about the complaints that people make about the evils of digital rights management–the locks and restrictions distributors often attach to digital media like music, movies and books–but this is the sort of incident that gives those gripes some gravitas. If you’re buying bits, you ought to own those bits, just as you would when you plunk down dollars for a CD, a book or any other physical item.

Doubly confusing: As far as I can tell, Amazon’s license terms don’t have any loophole that allows for this. The section on “digital content” explains that I don’t have the right to “sell, rent, lease, distribute,” etc., the stuff I buy from Amazon. But it sure looks like stuff I buy, I keep:

Upon your payment of the applicable fees set by Amazon, Amazon grants you the non-exclusive right to keep a permanent copy of the applicable Digital Content and to view, use, and display such Digital Content an unlimited number of times, solely on the Device or as authorized by Amazon as part of the Service and solely for your personal, non-commercial use. Digital Content will be deemed licensed to you by Amazon under this Agreement unless otherwise expressly provided by Amazon.

So, what am I missing here? I’ve asked Amazon for comment, but if anyone has any bright ideas, sound off in comments below.

UPDATE: Amazon says the copies it sold were “illegal”, because the publisher never had the rights to them. But it says that going forward, it won’t be removing books from customer’s Kindles “in these circumstances”.

But I have a question: Whatever happened to eMusic’s search for a new CEO?

David Pakman, who ran the company since 2005, left last fall to join Venrock, the Rockefeller family’s venture capital arm. Last I heard, in late October, the company was “looking at a handful of very qualified candidates” to replace him. And in the meantime, eMusic Chairman Danny Stein–who runs the investment company that owns eMusic and who ran eMusic himself prior to Pakman–was serving as interim CEO.

So who’s the new boss? Same as the old boss. It’s also old news.

Stein says that’s he’s going to run the company for the foreseeable future, and that he figured that out way back in December: He just never announced it. “It was an easy decision to make”, he says.

Stein says he saw plenty of “very capable people”  but figures, a la Dick Cheney, that he was the right man for the job. He also says that the various headhunting companies who say they’re helping eMusic find a new CEO are doing so without his knowledge (or dollars).

Fair enough! The bigger question, as it has been for many years, is how eMusic fits into the larger digital music ecosystem. It sells DRM-free MP3 downloads, which some consumers like, via a subscription service, which most consumers don’t enjoy. Stein says the company has around 400,000 subscribers, and that that number has remained stready for a while. But he says his topline revenue still grew 40 percent last year, to $70 million. (No word on profits or lack thereof).

That’s a pittance compared to Apple’s iTunes (AAPL)  store, which moves about $2 billion worth of songs every year. And while eMusic was once a couple of signatures away from selling to Amazon (AMZN), that window looks like it’s closed, as the retailer launched its own MP3 store a year ago.

But perhaps there’s still an M&A opportunity for eMusic for a different retailer that wants to get into digital goods; Best Buy (BBY) did something similar when it bought up Napster last year.

But COO (and temporary CEO) Tim Cook’s dismissal of the netbook market will continue to spark speculation that the company is readying something that sits in between a laptop and an iPhone (which is itself a computer, of course). Silicon Alley Insider’s Dan Frommer got more of Cook’s response than I did so I’ll reprint his quote here:

“When I look at what is being sold in the netbook space today, I see cramped keyboards, terrible software, junky hardware, very small screens, and just not a consumer experience and not something we would put the Mac brand on. So it’s not a space–as it exists today–that we’re interested in, nor do we believe that customers in the long term would be interested in. That said, we do look at the space and are interested in how customers respond to it. People who want a small computer than does browsing and email might want to buy an iPod touch or iPhone. We play indirect basis. Then of course if we find a way where we can deliver an innovative product that really makes a contribution, then we’ll do that. We have some interesting ideas in this space.”

EARLIER:

Apple (AAPL) just turned in a strong quarter and followed it up with conservative guidance. A fairly typical performance for the company. Now investors will want to know about new product lines, Steve Jobs’s health and other matters. I’ll be covering the call live. Please refresh this page for the most current information. Click here if you want to listen in yourself.

Joining call now. Tim Cook CFO Peter Oppenheimer going over info that’s already in the release.

Mac products: 2.2 million Macs, a three percent decline year-to-year. Tough comparison from last year. But better than the seven percent drop in PC sales overall. “We feel very positive about our Mac performance.” Began and ended quarter with three-to-four weeks of Mac inventory.

iPod: People still buying ‘em! iPod touch selling well, and so are apps. Claims people like the new shuffle player. [Dubious about that]. We own the MP3 player market. [Duh.] Began and ended the quarter with four-to-six weeks of inventory.

iTunes store: 35,000 apps available in store, up from 15,000 a quarter ago. “We are within hours” of one billions app downloaded.

iPhones: Unless I’m missing something, absolutely no new data here. Praising new iPhone 0S 3.0 that’s in the works. Apple delayed the start of revenue recognition of all iPhones sold after the company announced the new OS, which was March 17. Will start up again once OS is released.

Stores: Half our Macs sold to people who had never owned one before. Average revenue per store is down year over year, because the economy is lousy.

Gross margins: Commodity and other component costs lower than expected. Higher-margin sales better are also than expected. Apple also spent less on operating expenses than expected.

Guidance: Forecasting is “challenging” in macroenvironment. Again, noting delay in revenue recognition for iPhones (see above). Excited about new products in pipeline, etc.

Q&A

Outlook for pricing on component supply? Mostly favorable, but some commodities, like NAND, will increase sequentially. Cook does not expect to see the level of reduction seen in calendar Q1. Will it be down? It will be “in a similar range as last quarter.”

Cash flow issues? Not really, for several reasons: 1) Apple made prepayment to…. [sorry, I didn't catch who that was]; 2) accounts payable were down, from holiday quarter to spring quarter, which is standard; 3) at $1.3 billion, tax payments were up “significantly” from last year.

Mac business: Desktops selling well, but average selling price down quite a bit. What’s going on? Sales accelerated in March after Apple announced new product launch. Higher-end Pro products sold to professionals are down a bit, which is related to economy for obvious reasons. Education sales also down a bit, for same reasons. Hoping Federal stimulus funds will help with that.

Back to netbooks–why won’t Apple sell them? Cook is still criticizing netbooks. The ones available today are ”just not a consumer experience and not something we would put the Mac brand on, quite frankly. It’s not a space today that we’re interested in, and it’s not a space we think that customers in the long-term are interested in.” But… a slight hedge with regard to smaller computers, which are, of course, what the iPhone and iPod Touch are. We “have interesting ideas in this space.” Today’s netbooks really shouldn’t even be called computers, really.

App store: What’s the mix between paid and free downloads and the iPod and iTouch mix? Nope. Apple won’t say. Again, Cook notes that we’re just “hours away” from the one billionth download. Cook: One of the keys behind the growth of iPod has been that sales of the iPod touch “more than doubled year-over-year.” The iPod and iPod Touch have reached sales of 37 million units, a big platform for developers. So there’s a virtuous cycle there.

[Sorry, missed two questions here.]

Why is Apple still doing an exclusive with AT&T for the iPhone? And how’s Steve Jobs? AT&T (T) is the best wireless provider in the U.S. “They have done a very good job with iPhone….We’re very happy with the relationship we have and do not intend to change it.” Structurally, we’re using GSM architecture, and Verizon (VZ) uses CDMA, and we wanted a world phone.

And Steve Jobs? Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer: “We look forward to Steve returning to Apple at the end of June.” [Translation: No news.]

[Yet another question missing here. Apologies.]

Any info on DRM-free/”iTunes plus” sales? Too early to tell.

How much impact did Wal-Mart (WMT) have on Apple sales? Very key partner for the iPod. The company believes Wal-Mart provides extended reach. Pleased with results, but “early going, and not much to report there yet.”

So many iPhone Apps. How can you make them easier to find on iTunes? (Same problem as music.) Any kind of unusual patterns? Nonanswer here.

Please talk about competition for smartphones–i.e., please discuss the Palm (PALM) Pre. “Difficult to comment on products that aren’t shipping. So there’s nothing intelligent I could say on the Pre.” But “we think we’re years ahead.” We see things through software lens and that has benefited us and customers very well. Power of device and ecosystem enormous and we’re now just scratching the surface.”

What about suing Palm re: patents on the Pre, etc.? “We think that Apple’s innovation is leading the industry by years. We think competition is great; we think it makes all of us better as long as other companies invent their own stuff.”

Better late than never: Apple (AAPL) has deals in place with three of the big music labels–Warner Music Group (WMG), Sony (SNE) and Universal Music Group–to sell DRM-free songs. In exchange, Jobs will give the labels some ability to introduce “flexible pricing”–a key demand for the industry. CNET’s Greg Sandoval reported the news yesterday, citing sources; I’ve confirmed with my own industry sources this morning. Expect an announcement this week; the logical timing would be during today’s MacWorld keynote. [UPDATE: Here's the press release]

You’ll be hearing a lot of hubbub in the Techmemeworld about the move: DRM has been one of the tech world’s biggest bugaboos. If you believe the people who write blogs and leave blog comments (please do!), the fact that the labels have sold their music with DRM has been a drag on iTunes sales.

But I don’t think that’s the case: Apple moves some two billion songs a year via iTunes, and unless you’re in a small minority of people who want to do something with your iTunes song other than listen to it on your computer, iPhone, or iPod, you’ll find it hard to butt heads with a DRM restriction.

In the real world, few people have even heard of DRM. That’s one reason why the fact that Amazon’s (AMZN) Jeff Bezos has sold DRM-free music for all of 2008 doesn’t seem to have helped the company even dent Apple’s commanding market share. And think about it this way: Who’s more eager to sell digital music–Steve Jobs or the struggling music labels? If DRM-free tunes were a cure-all, you would have seen the big guys moving to drop it a long time ago.

The bigger news here is the move to add flexible pricing to the iTunes store. The labels have long pushed for the ability to mark up certain songs above the 99-cent mark, and Jobs hasn’t given in (he initally sold EMI’s DRM-free songs for a premium, but ended that after a few months). Neither CNET nor I have details about the pricing, but expect three tiers: One for in-demand songs, one for “long tail” back catalog and one for midrange stuff.

If Apple and the labels play this right, the tiered pricing could move the needle. But it won’t be at the high end: While there’s some opportunity to squeeze a few more cents out of the buyers who absolutely have to have the new Beyoncé song, the real opportunity will be selling lots and lots of music at a steep discount.

That’s if the labels go ahead and offer music at a significant discount, which I think they will be reluctant to do, for various reasons (more on that later). But let’s hold off and see what the pricing actually looks like first.

UPDATE: Expect the following tiers: $0.79, $0.99 and $1.29 per track, I’m told. [Update: Make that $0.69, $0.99 and $1.29] Disappointing but understandable: I’d like the labels to sell most of their music for 50 cents or less; they think their best music is worth much more than $1.29.

UPDATE 2: Also coming to iTunes: Over-the-air downloads for iPhone 3G users.

If you view Amazon’s MP3 store as a would-be iTunes-killer, or even a would-be iTunes rival, it has failed miserably. Neither Amazon (AMZN) nor its big label partners–Warner Music Group (WMG), EMI Music Group, Sony (SNE) and Universal Music Group–is publicly releasing any sales numbers. But the best estimates I’ve been able to get from label executives give Amazon 5-to-10 percent of the digital music market, with Apple (AAPL) hanging on to its 70+ percent share.

Billboard reaches the same conclusion, pegging Amazon’s market share at eight percent. Lucas Gonze, a smart digital music guy who spent a brief stint at Yahoo (YHOO) after it acquired his start-up, does some back-of-the-envelope math and concludes that Amazon’s store contributed all of $82 million to the music business, and that Universal collected most of that. That same math means that Amazon grossed all of $39 million from its music store.

And while Amazon’s presence–and the fact that all of its music was sold as MP3s, meaning there were no DRM locks on the songs–was supposed to give the labels more leverage when they negotiated with Apple, we have yet to see Steve Jobs make any significant changes in his contracts.

But the labels would still rather have Amazon in the game. The fact that the world’s biggest e-commerce company is in the music business does have some tangible benefits, like giving players an easy way to get into the music business: Both News Corp.’s (NWS) MySpace and T-Mobile’s new G1/Google (GOOG) phone, for instance, use Amazon to sell downloads. There’s no way Apple would have worked with either platform.

And Amazon can afford to lose money as it figures out its digital media strategy–the company logged nearly $4.3 billion in sales last quarter alone. Right now, it seems content to serve a handful of dedicated MP3 fans/anti-DRM zealots who are actively shunning Apple. But I’m guessing Jeff Bezos and crew have bigger ambitions. So when do we see what those look like?