Quote:
Originally Posted by pricecw
It is the author's fault. No publisher has any rights to an author's work, and can not do anything with that work without the author's explicit permission. So, this is 100% the author's fault. Maybe they had pressure, or greed, or just a desire to have their work published that had them sign away the ability to do this. Maybe they believe this is how it should be done, so had no problem signing away the ability to manage it. Either way, it is in the end their right, and their responsibility, and their fault it is done the way it is.
|
Unless an author self-publishes, they don't set the price of the book. The publisher does. I know this because I know people who have written books and been published. A publishing house is going to price a book at what they think it'll sell for, and for the profit margin they want. Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to stay in business. Yes, the author has to agree to the terms of the contract, but that doesn't mean the author knows the pricing of the book before they sign.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pricecw
Now, wrt the 1-star review. Amazon has said it is a valid review. People are basically telling others to not use the system in a valid way, just so their life isn't made a little harder in sorting them. I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for those who want others to change valid behavior so their life isn't a little more difficult, especially when the others are using social speech to try and change corporate (and potentially government) behavior.
--Carl
|
There's a difference between what's permissible and what is good or right. It's important not to confuse the two. While I won't argue that the one-star reviews based on price are impermissible on Amazon's site, that doesn't mean they're good for the system. They're not even
intended to be good for the system. They're intended to subvert it. How can a "review" of a book that doesn't even address the book's content
not subvert the system?