Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
Have you considered that most top US administration officials either are major publisher authors, or fancy one day becoming one? Ditto for the Supreme Court. While most of these people try to maintain objectivity, there are limits to how far they will bend over backwards against their self-interest. So, I think, the chances that authors will be hauled into court, for a speech act, even a commercial speech act, is close to zero.
But I could be wrong. Then the triumphant editorials, in mainland China's official media, concerning the hypocrisy of US government complaints about treatment of Chinese authors, will write themselves.
On a less confrontational note: I am reading a Hachette novel published yesterday, and found this on the copyright page:
I presume this notice is quite new. And I presume it is related to the subject matter of this thread. And I wonder if this silly waste of ink and/or electrons will mar our books for the rest of our lives. |
One thing that I have noted on the internet is those who are more interested in pushing a particular point of view or agenda, rather than have a discussion tend to mock and ridicule anything that doesn't agree with their specific agenda. The more frantic the mocking, the more likely the point which they are mocking is something worth thinking about.
In Anti-trust law, the dominate player (in this case, Amazon) is held to a much tougher standard than the other players. When one claims that an individual author opens himself up to anti-trust suits because of a letter asking the dominate ebook seller to play nice or because he or she files a complaint with the DOJ then one is, IMPO, simply engaging in fantasy. It might make for an amusing post for the like minded, but it has no rational basis in reality.