Quote:
Originally Posted by Barcey
2) The publishers have a life plus 70 year monopoly on individual books. That power is absolute and can be abused just as much (if not more) than Amazon's power. They accumulated and consolidated that power in the last few decades and that is also damaging. There is loads of evidence that they've also colluded. When he doesn't consider those facts objectively it comes off as one sided and propaganda.
|
This is not correct. In almost all instances, today, copyright is held by the author not the publisher. In the olden days it was the publisher who owned the copyright, but not today. (And before you go point to specific examples, yes, there are instances where the publisher holds it. I am speaking generally and not in a specific instance.)
There isn't "loads" of evidence of collusion and the "evidence" that was presented is equally open to the interpretation of no collusion when looked at objectively.