Far be it from me to intervene in this diatribe about Amazon, Universal and their policies, but sometimes my brain thinks things out in odd ways.
For someone who's supposed to destroy several albums and provide photographic proof, what's to stop that unscrupulous person from getting hold of a $2 used copy of say, A SONG FOR YOU, and construct the destruction picture so that it appears to be an album from the box set? This way, they could theoretically, for very little money, provide satisfactory destruction pictures for Universal or Amazon or whoever's asking for the destruction, and keep the recently-purchased set relatively intact, and then sell that set on eBay when their new set arrives.
My question for those who've been asked to destroy and photograph, do they need to see photographic evidence of a close-up of the label?
For someone who's supposed to destroy several albums and provide photographic proof, what's to stop that unscrupulous person from getting hold of a $2 used copy of say, A SONG FOR YOU, and construct the destruction picture so that it appears to be an album from the box set? This way, they could theoretically, for very little money, provide satisfactory destruction pictures for Universal or Amazon or whoever's asking for the destruction, and keep the recently-purchased set relatively intact, and then sell that set on eBay when their new set arrives.
My question for those who've been asked to destroy and photograph, do they need to see photographic evidence of a close-up of the label?