Latest Authors United letter to Amazon Board

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by Barcey

Apparently Authors United is going to complain to the DoJ now. I would hate to see what would happen if they started taking sides.

Now all that Preston has to do is actually find information to send them.

These idiots are unbelievable. By all means do go complain to the DoJ about how Amazon is still selling Hatchette books WITHOUT a contract when by law they could easily stop doing so without any problem at all.

Judge Cote would probably give them a lecture that would blister their ears so bad that it would spread all the way down to their collective asses!

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

These idiots are unbelievable. By all means do go complain to the DoJ about how Amazon is still selling Hatchette books WITHOUT a contract when by law they could easily stop doing so without any problem at all.

Judge Cote would probably give them a lecture that would blister their ears so bad that it would spread all the way down to their collective asses!

It's even better...
Over at the Digital Reader it's been pointed out that many of those idiots have incorporated as companies. So, by banding together to intimidate Amazon, they can be charged with antitrust themselves.

And they just invited the DOJ to investigate the whole mess.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

So, by banding together to intimidate Amazon, they can be charged with antitrust themselves.

And they just invited the DOJ to investigate the whole mess.

Have you considered that most top US administration officials either are major publisher authors, or fancy one day becoming one? Ditto for the Supreme Court. While most of these people try to maintain objectivity, there are limits to how far they will bend over backwards against their self-interest. So, I think, the chances that authors will be hauled into court, for a speech act, even a commercial speech act, is close to zero.

But I could be wrong. Then the triumphant editorials, in mainland China's official media, concerning the hypocrisy of US government complaints about treatment of Chinese authors, will write themselves.

On a less confrontational note: I am reading a Hachette novel published yesterday, and found this on the copyright page:

The publisher is not responsible for websites (or their content) that are not owned by the publisher.

I presume this notice is quite new. And I presume it is related to the subject matter of this thread. And I wonder if this silly waste of ink and/or electrons will mar our books for the rest of our lives.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Have you considered that most top US administration officials either are major publisher authors, or fancy one day becoming one? Ditto for the Supreme Court. While most of these people try to maintain objectivity, there are limits to how far they will bend over backwards against their self-interest. So, I think, the chances that authors will be hauled into court, for a speech act, even a commercial speech act, is close to zero.

But I could be wrong. Then the triumphant editorials, in mainland China's official media, concerning the hypocrisy of US government complaints about treatment of Chinese authors, will write themselves.

On a less confrontational note: I am reading a Hachette novel published yesterday, and found this on the copyright page:



I presume this notice is quite new. And I presume it is related to the subject matter of this thread. And I wonder if this silly waste of ink and/or electrons will mar our books for the rest of our lives.

One thing that I have noted on the internet is those who are more interested in pushing a particular point of view or agenda, rather than have a discussion tend to mock and ridicule anything that doesn't agree with their specific agenda. The more frantic the mocking, the more likely the point which they are mocking is something worth thinking about.

In Anti-trust law, the dominate player (in this case, Amazon) is held to a much tougher standard than the other players. When one claims that an individual author opens himself up to anti-trust suits because of a letter asking the dominate ebook seller to play nice or because he or she files a complaint with the DOJ then one is, IMPO, simply engaging in fantasy. It might make for an amusing post for the like minded, but it has no rational basis in reality.

[DiapDealer]

I know, right? Those amusing, fantastical posts are almost as annoying as the sole-voice-of-reason-in-a-madhouse posts.

[fjtorres]

The whole Authors United effort is strictly a farce, which is why they are being mocked by their peers, ignored by Amazon (and the DOJ), and embarrassed all over.

Their letters are simply not worthy of being taken seriously.
From the opening of the first letter (where they proclaim they aren't "taking sides", yet promptly proceed to lambaste Amazon and demand they cave in to Hachette) to the latest public effort (where they insult authors from China, first, and then all non-US authors, and demean pretty much everybody who works for a living) they have done nothing but let their egos run free.
Well, puffed up egos scream to be mocked.

If they ever stop lying about the catfight, ever address the cause of their "distress"--Hachette's unwillingness to negotiate in good faith or even accept any of Amazon's offers to compensate authors--ever accept that they are *not* a party to the negotiations at *all* (they fracking *sold* their interests for their million dollar advances for life plus seventy) then maybe... maybe, they might recover a shred of dignity. (Not going to hold my breath, though.)

But until then, puffery and lies will be met with mockery.
It's an old tradition, folks.

Lawrence Block tweets on twits:
https://mobile.twitter.com/LawrenceB...63819743465472

no, you won't find my name on that list of twits.

If all you read and see is the NYT, you might think the twits are winning.
Go outside the echo chamber of manhattanite publishing and you'll find that the vast majority of people outside don't know or don't care, or actually agree with Amazon.

And the latest Harris poll has Amazon's popularity at an all-time high.
Dig it up, dudes.
Do some homework for a change.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

One thing that I have noted on the internet is those who are more interested in pushing a particular point of view or agenda, rather than have a discussion tend to mock and ridicule anything that doesn't agree with their specific agenda. The more frantic the mocking, the more likely the point which they are mocking is something worth thinking about.

In Anti-trust law, the dominate player (in this case, Amazon) is held to a much tougher standard than the other players. When one claims that an individual author opens himself up to anti-trust suits because of a letter asking the dominate ebook seller to play nice or because he or she files a complaint with the DOJ then one is, IMPO, simply engaging in fantasy. It might make for an amusing post for the like minded, but it has no rational basis in reality.

Yep. And that's why I pointed out that there were companies conspiring against Amazon, but did not actually say they were violating antitrust laws.

I considered writing that post but then realized just how silly it sounded.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Yep. And that's why I pointed out that there were companies conspiring against Amazon, but did not actually say they were violating antitrust laws.

Oh, they probably aren't.
But odds are they are closer to the edge than Amazon...yet they are the fools inviting the feds in. Who will, of course, start by looking at both Amazon/Hachette documents and Preston/Hachette documents and go from there.

Feds love to be invited on fishing trips...

[fjtorres]

Next up into the ring, a no-holds-barred cage match:

Lee Child vs Joe Konrath:
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/0...lee-child.html

Lee: Here’s my personal take … speaking generally, with a plural “you” … and as a guy entirely unafraid of the future, whatever it may bring – after all, I kicked your ass under the old system, and I’ll kick it under the new system, and the new-new, and the new-new-new, until I retire, or the lung cancer gets me, whichever comes first. I’m completely confident of that, and you’d be an idiot to bet against me. We both started from nowhere, and in the last three weeks I sold more ebooks – of one title – than you have sold in your entire life. Or will sell.

It's just a friendly chat, really.

Honest!

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Next up into the ring, a no-holds-barred cage match:

Lee Child vs Joe Konrath:
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/0...lee-child.html



It's just a friendly chat, really.

Honest!

What's really funny about his throwing his sales figure around is that most of his success is due to a kickass marketing team and not his writing or personal effort.

He's not only using book sales to say his voice is more important, he's also basing his importance on someone else's work.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

What's really funny about his throwing his sales figure around is that most of his success is due to a kickass marketing team and not his writing or personal effort.

He's not only using book sales to say his voice is more important, he's also basing his importance on someone else's work.

Konrath swears they're buddies but to me, the choice of tack... grates...

Where I come from, culturally and professionally both, that kind of talk even in jest is unacceptable. In the context of the elitist entitlement of Preston and Patterson it really isn't funny to me.

Then again, most British humor doesn't really work for me.

This one I'll let others snark or take seriously.

Pass!

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Konrath swears they're buddies but to me, the choice of tack... grates...

I think Lee has taken Jack Reacher to much to heart. He just comes across like a blow hard to me.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Next up into the ring, a no-holds-barred cage match:

Lee Child vs Joe Konrath:
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/0...lee-child.html



It's just a friendly chat, really.

Honest!

I personally don't have a problem with what Lee Child said. The tone at the start was probably just a carry on from how they spoke to each other over beers. I don't think he intended it to be published on the blog but obviously he doesn't care. "I made tons of money and I'll probably continue to make tons of money, either way I have more then I can spend so screw the world."

He was honest about his position. He didn't say that he agreed with anything in the letter but he signed it because he believes that Amazon needs to be gelded to save the big publishers and allow a few authors to make big bucks. I don't agree with him but at least he's clear where he stands.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

These idiots are unbelievable. By all means do go complain to the DoJ about how Amazon is still selling Hatchette books WITHOUT a contract when by law they could easily stop doing so without any problem at all.

Judge Cote would probably give them a lecture that would blister their ears so bad that it would spread all the way down to their collective asses!

I am shocked. They complain Amazon removed preorder buttons that they refused to pay for? While big bad Amazon versus the poor struggling snowflakes had initial appeal, as this progresses, the snowflakes are acting more like toddlers having a temper tantrum.

Since Amazon is still selling Hatchette books, I can't imagine the argument they will be making to the DOJ, but I am sure it will be well-written.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

And the latest Harris poll has Amazon's popularity at an all-time high.

The US public even rates them #1 for "Workplace Environment:"

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/New...4/Default.aspx

I wonder what people who live in metropolitan Seattle would have said about this.

I think asking people what they think of Amazon's workplace environment is a little ridiculous. Unlike in the case of, say, Walmart, few of the people who are answering this question have ever seen an Amazon workplace, or, talked with an Amazon worker (or, and these are more numerous, an ex-Amazon-worker). My guess is that before being asked the question most of the respondents had no ideas concerning Amazon's workplace environment, and they obligingly came up with an answer on the fly. It doesn't mean they really have an opinion on the subject.