|
Monopolies are never a good thing. However, there are "natural monopolies" where the cost or complexities of having competing services makes giving a monopoly to one provider the best solution. Examples of this are water and sewer , electricity, wired telephone and cable services. It isn't practical to have competing water mains or sewer pipes. The same is true for the other services. As a result, one provider is granted a monopoly and is then very closely regulated, usually by stating the rate of return that they are allowed. When the phone company had a monopoly on long distance, the profits on long distance subsidized local service. Opening up the long distance market made long distance cheaper, but the cost of local service has skyrocketed.
Other than regulated services, where a regulated monopoly is sometimes a better solution, monopolies are never in the best interests of a society.
Amazon as a book seller is not a monopoly. However, it is the only source of DRM'd books for the Kindle. Since the major publishers will not sell books without DRM, Amazon has a monopoly on books for the Kindle, from the major publishers. More worrying is Amazon's ambition to become a publisher. Will Amazon's publications be available in any other format than their own? Unlikely.
I know, and maybe you know, how to strip DRM or convert formats, but most of the population does not. If Amazon uses this to dominate the market, and they will, then at the minimum, Amazon's formats must a)made open and b)available for free use by all. Or better yet, Amazon adopts an open standard.
If you are not an American, you may also be concerned (or maybe should be concerned) about an American company dominating foreign markets. Local or national companies will have local or national concerns. Multinationals have no concerns outside of themselves.
|