|
Thank you for posting this thread. After reading the Original Post and the linked article my feeling is one of frustration. The article reads like the usual Publishers propaganda and is written by an interested party very clearly from his own point of view. That is fine because it is clearly disclosed, and certainly does not per se mean that the article is inaccurate, despite its Chicken Little type "threat to intellectual freedom" and the hysterical tone.
So I went in search of further information. I found many similar propaganda type pieces, but remarkably could not find the terms which Amazon attempted to impose. One account said that such terms had not in fact been disclosed. Another indicated that the dispute was over terms for ebooks and print books were not affected. Perhaps it's simply my poor searching skills. So I ask, is anyone able to enlighter me as to what the new terms are that Amazon sought to impose which are so objectionable?
As you can gather from the tone of this post, I am sceptical. Surely if someone with a vested interest puts out a statement complaining of an attack on intellectual freedom by the worlds largest book retailer the detailed particulars of this attack should be included in bold highlighted capitals, and not left out altogether with no explanation for the omission. I am open to be convinced, but please give me some facts!
|