Authors United, allies, demand government intervention

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by jgaiser

Interesting, because it's right there at the top of 'Best Seller' list on the right of the page.

My screen doesn't show the Best Selllers on the right of the screen.

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by Fbone

My screen doesn't show the Best Selllers on the right of the screen.

I see it on this page.

[DiapDealer]

Quite a few books released today (notable to those that find them notable) that I don't see advertised anywhere.

*cough* Ernie Cline's Armada *cough*

[fjtorres]

Gotta say this about the Aurum gang: they bring out the best (snark) in people:

http://jenrasmussen.com/amazon-vs-au...nited-round-2/

http://www.teleread.com/publishing/a...ion-of-amazon/

[Crowl]

Originally Posted by Fbone

I have a big ad for "New and Notable Historical Fiction" on my home page. They could have used that space for GSAW, possibly the biggest (and most profitable) seller of the year.

If it is possibly the biggest seller of the year then why would it need additional advertising, from Amazon's perspective they would surely see more benefit from advertising stuff that will get a bigger boost.

When I went to the kindle books page on the .co.uk site, GSAW was prominently listed as the #1 in the bestseller list.

[murg]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

So you are saying that it is not even worth reading those 24 pages? They are not even slightly amusing, basically just a waste of time?

I could tell you this, without even having read it. It's from Authors United. Enough said.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by murg

I could tell you this, without even having read it. It's from Authors United. Enough said.

Yeah. I read into a small part of it until it started repeating itself. I do hope those so called authors write better books than that.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Yeah. I read into a small part of it until it started repeating itself. I do hope those so called authors write better books than that.

I'm pretty sure the thing is ghostwritten by a flunky, probably the WhaleMath™ guy. These are "important" people who expect time itself to roll back at their whim.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Gotta say this about the Aurum gang: they bring out the best (snark) in people:

http://jenrasmussen.com/amazon-vs-au...nited-round-2/

http://www.teleread.com/publishing/a...ion-of-amazon/

That is too funny. I love it.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by jhowell

I see it on this page.

Not on that page either. Apparently, Amazon knows I'm not interested in Best Seller lists.

[kennyc]

So you figure they colluded against Amazon?

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Suddenly, its 2014 all over at the NYT, huh?

You mean, good journalism once again, right

Seriously, I would have thought you would have found yesterday's article has enough Amazon-friendly paragraphs to be reasonably balanced:

The publishers settled the case. Apple lost at trial and lost again last month on appeal.

Judge Raymond J. Lohier Jr. of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, concurring with the majority, saw some merit to Apple’s and the publishers’ argument but said that “more corporate bullying is not an appropriate antidote to corporate bullying.”

Whether it is appropriate for the government to provide an antidote remains to be seen.

“Antitrust for the last 30 to 40 years has focused on economics — the price that someone pays for something,” said Michael Carrier, an antitrust expert at Rutgers School of Law in Camden, N.J. “It is an ill-fitting tool to address concerns about a company’s effects on culture.”

One indication of the tough road Amazon’s critics have is that the Justice Department official in charge of the antitrust division, William J. Baer, last month celebrated Amazon’s “disruptive business model” in e-books, saying it “has continued to stoke competition.”

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Since then, S&S renegotiated their contract without drama, Hachette stopped stalling and negotiated, and the rest of the Manhattan Syndicate reached deals allowing them to raise *their* ebook prices... and saw sales plunge.

Quarterly financials, as Bezos would likely agree, mean next to nothing. And decline doesn't mean plunge. And this is after a good year in the heart of the digital transition.

However, there's one thing I agree with in what I quote from you above. Amazon seems to be, for now, treating publishers more gently. It could actually be that Authors Guild tactics are working.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Lost somehow in all the whining is that nothing they complain about actually harms consumers, that antitrust is about consumer harm and not about protecting entitled authors seeing declining sales or B&M retailers unable to adapt to the internet.

It should be pointed out to anyone new to this that "consumers" here doesn't mean the average reader, but rather the people who buy new books shortly after release.

You are correct that the thrust of US antitrust enforcement, in recent years, has been consumer protection rather than, as previously, protection of smaller businesses. But in other countries Amazon does business, the approach is different. And in the US, the law is vague enough that the enforcement emphasis can change over time.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

It should be pointed out to anyone new to this that "consumers" here doesn't mean the average reader, but rather the people who buy new books shortly after release.

That is rubbish. If the people who buy new books shortly after release don't register as a significant portion of all readers or book purchases, then they simply disappear into statistics. If the publishers have to depend on those that buy books brand new right after release to stay afloat, then their business model is flawed. Please don't kid yourself, even on mass market the publisher makes a profit. Of course they don't want to since the profit margin is smaller.

[Fiat_Lux]

« Readers are presented with fewer books that espouse unusual, quirky, offbeat, or politically risky ideas, as well as books from new and unproven authors. This impoverishes America’s marketplace of ideas. One wonders if Common Sense
would have found a publisher in the current environment.»

Since when has any mainstream publisher been the first publisher of unusual, quirky, offbeat, or politically risky ideas?

[disconnected]

From the Times article --

Peter Meyers, author of “Breaking the Page,” a new book about the shift from print to screen, disagreed, saying “Amazon’s success has quashed competition” in e-books.

“Sure, there are the subscription services Oyster and Scribd, but those businesses aren’t really robust yet,” said Mr. Meyers.

If authors and legacy publishers want Oyster and Scribd to be more robust, why do they withhold most of their newest books?