|
From memory an author can opt-out of KU every 90 days. Contrast this with the rights grab by traditional publishing. Good luck to any author wanting the rights to their books back now. I also don't like exclusivity requirements in KU or elsewhere for that matter. But on the scale of individual authors it is a minor evil, particularly when it lasts only 90 days if they so choose. At a more "macro" level it gives Amazon a huge advantage in the whole Indic e-book market. This is why Kobo faces an uphill bettle with both its self-publishing and subscription models, though I wish it well and would love to see more competion.
So far as Amazon giving up exclusivity? I'd say only if they are forced to do so. What rational author would leave a title only in KU if they can publish elsewhere at the same time with no disadvantage. Without exclusivity Kobo would, I expect, be able to offer a broadly similar number of books to KU/KDP. And Amazon has a point. Where were Kobo and others now seeking to compete when Amazon was pioneering self-publishing and then subscription services of this type? If authors are not satisfied, they can walk.
Going wide is very much a decision for an individual authors. I have read of a number of authors who have experimented with going wide only to find that their Amazon sales were still more that their sales from all other channels combined. On the other hand KKR points out very rationally that it may take some time to build a market on each other platform. She also recommends going wide in at least the long term, both because of the "all your eggs in one basket" problem generally, and because proposed laws in the US targetting the large tech firms including Amazon nay have very adverse affects.
The Amazon is evil rhetoric is no more accurate than Amazon is perfect. The truth as usual is somewhere in between. Personally I fail to see any terrible evil in a rolling 90 day period of exclusivity.
|