Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
I'm not sure what you mean by "artificially" restricting their offers.
You seem to be arguing that once a book has been put up on Amazon, the book has some "right" to stay on Amazon. I think that this is incorrect, and that it is better for authors to have some time on Amazon than no time.
I also think that requiring Amazon to read all of the self-published stuff on their site would simply result in them not offering self-published stuff because it's not cost effective.
In any event, I fail to see why rejecting a book before it goes on Amazon is any better for the author than removing it afterwards.
|
Perhaps not a "right" that is enforceable in court but a reasonable expectation by both the customers and the authors. We are only talking about a file that is stored on a server for download, not about a physical book that requires storing space in a warehouse, after all.
However, if this isn't feasible then I expect a company of that size to be predictable and reliable in handling the issue of discontinuing books. I do not consider it as professional conduct to arbitrarily fob off one author with a completely meaningless claim that his work violates the content guidelines. We should keep in mind that apart from removing his book they also threatened to terminate his account if he submitted any more content that's considered to violate their guidelines. Yet their guidelines are so vague that they deserve the term "risible". This is what they say with regard to offensive content:
"What we deem offensive is probably about what you would expect."
They might just as well tell people that they will do what they damn well please. Hardly a sound foundation for a business relationship.