A Monopoly is Not Necessarily Bad

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by taustin

Michael Jackson is still touring?

I believe he is playing Vegas, together with Elvis.

[exaltedwombat]

Originally Posted by taustin

That simply cannot happen in a world where a homeless bum, literally, could use a free computer at a library, write a novel, put up a free web site to offer it for sale, and sell an unlimited number of copies.

Anybody can be a publisher these days. Literally, anybody, with virtually no startup costs.

You're muddled. The free web site is an excellent way of distributing his work, but the bum will remain homeless. Setting up a site with DRM and a payment system is non-trivial.

That's leaving out the practical impossibility of enforcing effective DRM on any media, music or text.

[QuantumIguana]

You can't sell what you don't have access to sell. If one company gets too powerful, they can demand exclusivity if someone wants access to their market. If that happens, it doesn't make any difference how many people start up websites. The small sellers simply wouldn't be able to sell the books.

[Native]

Rather than organizing around which percent to hate next, (Wal-Mart, Amazon etc.) it's more fun to be positive and root for the underdog. It's still possible to overcome convenience and attach to your own choices. Buying local is relevant to the internet, it just has a broader meaning.

[QuantumIguana]

I don't hate Amazon. I have a Kindle. I'm just cautious of anyone getting too much power. Competition keeps companies honest.

[JD Gumby]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I don't hate Amazon. I have a Kindle. I'm just cautious of anyone getting too much power. Competition keeps companies honest.

...until they start colluding, of course.

[BeccaPrice]

if they're colluding, it's not competition, then, is it?

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

if they're colluding, it's not competition, then, is it?

[inkyness]

I'm sure someone must have mentioned this in the previous pages, but one of the reasons I find an Amazon monopoly scary is that most people wouldn't be able to read their book collection on non-Kindle devices. For that reason alone, it would be very hard for another company to compete with Amazon for its existing customers in the future.

[Skydog]

Originally Posted by inkyness

I'm sure someone must have mentioned this in the previous pages, but one of the reasons I find an Amazon monopoly scary is that most people wouldn't be able to read their book collection on non-Kindle devices. For that reason alone, it would be very hard for another company to compete with Amazon for its existing customers in the future.

Not necessarily.

[nogle]

Originally Posted by Barcey

I don't fear an Amazon monopoly as long as they're acting as a reseller. It's easy to change retailers if they abuse the monopoly.

Please explain how you change retailers when there is only one.

[grumbles]

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.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by nogle

Please explain how you change retailers when there is only one.

Because these are digital goods and any other retailer with a large electronic commerce site can break the monopoly and start selling ebooks. The publishers could stop supplying the monopoly and start selling ebooks directly.

Amazon isn't stupid enough to try to create a monopoly of digital goods. They are trying to establish market dominance so they can negotiate the best deals with their suppliers. This is nothing but fear mongering.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by Barcey

Because these are digital goods and any other retailer with a large electronic commerce site can break the monopoly and start selling ebooks. The publishers could stop supplying the monopoly and start selling ebooks directly.

Can they? Not if a company has enough leverage to demand exclusivity.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

Can they? Not if a company has enough leverage to demand exclusivity.

Do you really believe that a company would attempt to establish a monopoly, force suppliers to sign exclusive deals, drive up prices and not expect the DoJ to step in and kill them?

A company with market dominance does have position of power in negotiations, that doesn't mean that suppliers have to be stupid and sign them over even more power.