Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
It was certainly the right thing to do. The world would have been deprived of Joe Konrath's fisking efforts had they believed they could succeed in Court. No doubt some people simply accepted their propaganda. But in many circles it was widely ridiculed. And their Amazon problem remains today. Duckie is correct.
Amazon has now faced a hostile administration for some time, yet the DOJ has taken no action. If Amazon is breaching anti-trust laws, why not? But if the DOJ won't, the Big 5 has shown they have no problems colluding so their solution is simple. Get together and sue Amazon. An easy award of treble damages and attorney fees! Injunctions restraining the offending conduct in future. A Judge might even appoint someone to supervise future compliance as happened with Apple. What on earth could be stopping them? Why be deterred by the minor detail that they have no case? They had none when they entered into the conspiracy, but did so anyway.
|
So what has Amazon done to the big 5 since the new administration? Amazon signed contracts with the Big 5 years ago and basically gave them everything they wanted. Why would the Big 5 sue? That's just silly.
As far as indie writers suing because Amazon is changing the terms on them, or 3rd parties suing because Amazon is cutting off access (such as authoralert), most of them don't have the resources to go against Amazon.
I personally don't think they would win anyway, but then again, if you go back and look at what I actually said rather than what is being projected by others, I said that Amazon needs to be careful when they squeeze their suppliers. No more, no less.
My point is that the current administration won't give them a flier like the previous administration did. Remember several judges during the Apple trial said that they thought that Amazon likely was engaged in an anti-trust violation, but that Amazon was not the company on trial. Jacobs came out and said as much in his opinion. Heck, even Cote acknowledged it in passing.