Amazon's vertical integration/monopoly

[notimp]

I find the way this discussion was successfully stifled - highly disturbing and in essence amoral.

Several mods in here used hyperbolic means effectively to make this a theoretical discussion between two camps. Amazon haters, and bored prolongers of a (questionable) status quo, who "had seen this pattern before".

It never was. The factual discussion based on details alongside Amazons new fileformat - and how bloggers as well as this community failed en large to educate readers on what happened with the introduction of .kfx by Amazon was demoted as a whole - I feel, by letting the discussion escalate into personal mattes (very emotionally charged), and the contemplation of "two fronts". Witch arent existent.

The, from my point of view, fake representation that there are two "camps" of people in here (structured in a way where the side challenging the established (but in parts - factually wrong) views would always have to argue that they hadnt nefarious motivations) was then constantly repeated by high reputation accounts - establishing the narrative.

Once that was done - and people started reacting to being marginalized even to the point of namecalling -

- some users then started to reframe the purpose of this thread and what it would be allowed and shouldn't be allowed to tackle.

.kfx wouldnt be able to be discussed in here - not even the parts where the monopoly of creation on part of Amazon impacted directly on freedoms of final layout - or trying to dismiss the falsely established notion of .kfx only being a distribution format - and therefore nothing, the normal public should be concerned with.

.kfx should purposely not be discussed in the context of a "powershift" - and especially not in here - as there were "other threads".

Those of course werent linked.

It was stated, that there would be a consensus - that .kfx "should be seen more neutrally" - and that such a discussion (on the file format level) had taken place within this group of people, in other threads, in the past. It hasnt.

The way this community treated .kfx until recently was to look at it as a "fun and exciting challenging riddle" that - as time went by - and the notion set in, that it probably wouldnt be easy to reverse engineer it as well - simply was ignored in the general discussion. While its propagation within the market is steadily increasing.

I also didnt ignore parts of the discussion because of the language barrier - I chose to react to counterarguments selectively and often with days in between postings, in an effort to let the discussion "cool of" in the periods in between - to become more factual and less ego driven, emotional or personal.

You can look at the postings above to see how well that has turned out.

In an effort to get back on to the factual level (which might require to talk about the design philosophy of the .kfx format, if people try to argue it is distribution related only) - I let this stand as a reflection on what this discussion was made into within the last two pages.

I will now try to pick up from the arguments and reactions two pages back.

[knc1]

More preaching and ranting, still no supporting references for the author's opinions.

[notimp]

Originally Posted by darryl

It's hard to understand exactly what his positions are. My interpretation is that the (false) premise of Amazon owning the physical act of publishing is what gives Amazon the power to destroy culture, whilst the destruction itself is caused by Amazon's business models treating books as fungible commodities rather than sacred cultural icons. That old chestnut. Making publishing and distribution of ebooks easy and affordable for everyone "cheapens" the book. Destroys, as I think he described it, those structures built up over time. Minor point really. What I would like him to do, and I am not holding my breath, is to properly engage in a debate rather than simple preaching and repetition.

First the usual playful antagonization - "hard to understand" is a euphemism for "hard to put into one camp or the other".

To explain my position -

I contemplate - that by increasing intellectual ownership over the entire production (the analogy is "printing the master copy") and distribution chain with .kfx - Amazon is overreaching its promoted role as a "distributer" and "manager/facilitator" on the sector.

Its intent with .kfx is not to distribute works of culture, it is to own them (even in "a new sense" if you must), and to control every (to them business related) aspect of them.

Two qualifiers - when I am talking about "ownership over the entire production and distribution chain" I am specifically talking about - the most current, mass market oriented, chain. Older chains (formats, and in niche cases distribution) they implicitly allow to coexists - but they dont engage in the promotion of those ecosystems anymore.

Books as "cultural icons" is an overemphasis on on their role in modern democracies - my point only being - that in our current societies they have to be treated as more than just commodities - where none of us should be interested in who owns the processes and how the market is increasingly formed by one entity.

If you read back on my positions in the past - I wasnt even against Amazons dominant role within the eBook sector as a whole - I saw them as being disruptive, modernizing to an extend.

I changed my position entirely - when I caught them with their hand in the proverbial chookie jar - of creating proprietary creation and distribution chains - to feed their need to control that people can read the "best version of a book" - only when they have bought it from Amazon.

And to create this model - they have taken the ability to create this book out of authors or publishers hands. Or more broadly spoken - out of societies hands.

I'm always open to a debate about those points - allthough until now - we were arguing each others standpoints ("Are you good or evil?") much more frequently. You as well, if I may say that.

[notimp]

Originally Posted by knc1

More preaching and ranting, still no supporting references for the author's opinions.

No preaching. Maybe reframing - what some of you did to this thread within the last page or so. Find me one factual wrong, to make me rethink my position.

Or better, lets move on.

I just had to make my position clear on what has happened on the last page - you had in effect - prevented the discussion from being able to continue.

No one could argue in here anymore without addressing the inner politics within this thread.

I would like to move the discussion away from politics if possible, because I deem it to be more important.
-

Also as a tip (for the n00bs ) in general - dont try to defend people, not even me - try to defend or explain standpoints - they are much harder to shut down.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by notimp

I chanced my position entirely - when I cought them with their hand in the proverbal chookie jar - of creating proprietary creation and distribution chains - to feed their need to control that people can read the "best version of a book" - only when they have bought it from Amazon.

In what way do ePub bookstores have creation and distribution chains that are any less proprietary? Adobe "own" their proprietary DRM mechanism just as absolutely as Amazon own the KFX format, as do Apple with their iBooks format.

[knc1]

Originally Posted by notimp

= = =
Also as a tip (for the n00bs ) in general - dont try to defend people, not even me - try to defend or explain standpoints - they are much harder to shut down.

Provide references, in addition to opinion.

Start at the start, give us a link to the meeting in Germany that you first quoted.

Conferences generate documentation of their activities.
Academic supported movements generate documentation.
Links please.

Without references, this is all just one person's, personal opinion.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by notimp

I find the way this discussion was successfully stifled - highly disturbing and in essence amoral.

Several mods in here used hyperbolic means effectively to make this a theoretical discussion between two camps. Amazon haters, and bored prolongers of a (questionable) status quo, who "had seen this pattern before".

What stifling of opinions? I think I am allowed to hold a different opinion than yours.

- some users then started to reframe the purpose of this thread and what it would be allowed and shouldn't be allowed to tackle.

.kfx wouldnt be able to be discussed in here - not even the parts where the monopoly of creation on part of Amazon impacted directly on freedoms of final layout - or trying to dismiss the falsely established notion of .kfx only being a distribution format - and therefore nothing, the normal public should be concerned with.

.kfx should purposely not be discussed in the context of a "powershift" - and especially not in here - as there were "other threads".

I have no problem with you mentioning KFX.
However, I think you should make a token effort at least, to tie in what you are saying to the idea of "Amazon's vertical integration/monopoly".

Those of course werent linked.

You're right, I don't know what I was thinking.

Now, it isn't too hard to find, it is on the first page of the "Kindle Formats" subforum, just as expected.

But anyway, here is a link for you. Hopefully it isn't too outdated, it's a month old:

Originally Posted by eschwartz

P.S. Aren't we basically just rehashing the discussion from: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=263902

Here is another link, just in case:

Originally Posted by darryl

Over in the kfx thread, jhowell has been good enough to inform us that the last release of Kindle for Android introduces the kfx format. It now downloads kfx books where available. Interestingly enough, this is not listed in the "What's New" notes. I imagine similar changes to Kindle For PC are not far off.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...&postcount=245

Now for the real kicker: You have posted twice to date in that very thread

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by notimp

I contemplate - that by increasing intellectual ownership over the entire production (the analogy is "printing the master copy") and distribution chain with .kfx - Amazon is overreaching its promoted role as a "distributer" and "manager/facilitator" on the sector.

I fail to see how this is true.

The publisher or author still runs off the master DOCX/EPUB/PDF, and uploads it to Amazon. Instead of -- or rather, in addition to -- converting that to AZW3 for Kindle sales, Amazon now converts it to KFX.

DRM is an accepted concept in the commercial ebook market. Legally and culturally speaking, the distributor will always and forevermore own the ebook that you supposedly bought but which in practice you may merely have rented (for a flat, one-time fee).

Thus far, I am in agreement with you that society itself is deeply flawed in letting this happen.

But "there is nothing new under the sun", and KFX is no different than AZW3.
We have already discussed how it took approximately 6 months for AZW3 to be understood well enough to create with open-source tools. But these days, it is a fait accompli, and who thinks about that?

Two qualifiers - when I am talking about "ownership over the entire production and distribution chain" I am specifically talking about - the most current, mass market oriented, chain. Older chains (formats, and in niche cases distribution) they implicitly allow to coexists - but they dont engage in the promotion of those ecosystems anymore.

Mind explaining what this means?
If you are referring to paper books, Amazon started out as a paper book seller, and they sell more paper books than any other single entity, I think.

And if you are referring to competitor bookstores, then you have only said "Amazon doesn't promote the idea that you buy from their competitors".

So I'm not really sure how to respond to your statement, save with deep confusion.

[elborak]

Originally Posted by notimp

"hard to understand" is a euphemism for "hard to put into one camp or the other"

It can be. In this case, it's merely an accurate description of your essentially opaque writing style.

After more verbiage than any other poster on this thread, I still don't really know what point you're trying to make.

[johnnyb]

Originally Posted by elborak

It can be. In this case, it's merely an accurate description of your essentially opaque writing style.

After more verbiage than any other poster on this thread, I still don't really know what point you're trying to make.

I think there is absolutely nothing not to understand about his point: Amazon controls a proprietary format which is genuinely problematic in this specific case because:
1. The format is undocumented and cannot be created by end-users (unlike Apple which provides their own editing software, albeit only for Mac)
2. Amazon is the largest ebook vendor in the western (or free, as some Americans like to put it) world.
3. There are potential problems arising from the combination of 1 and 2, that is, if the largest vendor of ebooks centralizes ebook production and begins to control a culturally supercharged product such as the book (this is an entirely different situation than the one several Gutenberg vs scribes polemics suggested).

This discussion may not be new but it is certainly far from concluded, which makes me really wonder where all the hate comes from (it may be that notimp is correct in his assumption that it is an effect of some users’ compartmentalizing mentality).

[dickloraine]

I still don't understand, how kfx should impact the ability to produce books, if no one but amazon uses it. You never really answered that, other than dismissing my phrasing of it as a distribution format (and mixing up things I said about consumers and things I said about producers). As eschwartz has said a few paragraphs before, books are created in various ways, none involving amazons format before publishing on amazon.

And by establishing an indie-book market, amazon did have a in my opinion good effect on the cultural landscape.

Many of the things that concern you, concern many people. But in my opinion you often argue on the wrong layer. It would be understandable if you used amazon as an example of problems you see. But you make them the source and the "enemy". But we really talk about things that are "wrong" in how politic and society handles or not handles them.

Finally a completly different point: competition. One reason for a proprietary format is, that you can innovate it in the way you think is best. If you look at the (non) adoption rate of epub3, the complains about it, the committees... It makes sense for amazon to have its own format. Must it be a closed format? Hell, no, and I think that is a legitimate criticism.

[dickloraine]

Oh, and one sidenote: Not answering for a few days to let a discussion "cool down" doesn't work in my opinion. It achieves the opposite mostly. I only think, wow,, another op who abandons his thread after his rant. And in addition : If I ask a question, I like it to be answered. As you can see on many reactions, people are more irritated if you only answer days later.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

I still don't understand, how kfx should impact the ability to produce books, if no one but amazon uses it. You never really answered that, other than dismissing my phrasing of it as a distribution format (and mixing up things I said about consumers and things I said about producers). As eschwartz has said a few paragraphs before, books are created in various ways, none involving amazons format before publishing on amazon.

It's not just that.

It's also the fact that even Amazon's post-submission processing into their storefront, includes both KFX and AZW3 (and even MOBI too, for that matter).
And it is trivially simple to download an AZW3. Assuming you care.

Why is that not good enough? No one has ever said Amazon is the bestest, awesomest, friendlyest, lovable group of people who absolutely want to see fair play and consumer choice yadda yadda yadda... but that is the nature of capitalism, the consumer market, and a sense of business.
Amazon is neither unusual nor extreme, just large, and nothing they do is illegal, so good luck trying to tale legal action against them (hasn't it failed enough yet? )

As consumers trying to look out for our own interests which aren't the same as that of Yet Another Big Company, we take the options we have, and holler if we see anything illegal.
Today, that means buying easily-liberated books from Amazon.

I know I have made this point before, but it bears repeating. If tomorrow, I cannot download AZW3 ebooks, and no one has figured out how to turn a KFX into something I can convert with calibre, then I will say "Amazon has finally made it impossible for me to get a product I can live with", and "$@^% Amazon to the deepest hells", and I will go buy my books elsewhere.

Just because someone doesn't think Amazon is doing anything wrong, does not mean they will rabidly defend anything and everything Amazon does.
I'm just in it for the books.


KFX is a non-issue on the monopolization of ebook authoring on so many levels...
But then, all it needs to be is an effective red herring.

On which note, I still haven't heard a good explanation as to what KFX has to do with monopolies.
But at least no one is trying, anymore, to invoke the suitability of KFX as a typographically friendly ebook format. For which he has my heartfelt thanks.

[elborak]

Originally Posted by johnnyb

This discussion may not be new but it is certainly far from concluded, which makes me really wonder where all the hate comes from (it may be that notimp is correct in his assumption that it is an effect of some users’ compartmentalizing mentality).

What "hate" are you referring to? This has been a quite civil debate by virtually any standard, and especially by the standards of online forums.

[darryl]

Thanks to elborak, knc1, dickloraine, eschwartz and Harry. You have left me with nothing worthwhile to post other than to urge notimp to abandon the repetitious preaching and engage by responding in a hopefully comprehensible fashion to the points you have each made.

And to please stop the baseless allegations of shutting down discussion and the like. This is quite simply nonsense.