2 ms·
No, I'm completely serious about it. > On each pirated book, the e-book "distributor" (i.e. google play) is doing nothing. They won't be doing any marketing, t
by golergka 8y ago
No, I'm completely serious about it.
> On each pirated book, the e-book "distributor" (i.e. google play) is doing nothing. They won't be doing any marketing, they won't have any distribution costs: it'll just be as if it were a less popular book than it actually is.
The author knew that, and yet he made voluntarily decision of going into an agreement with them. Disrespecting this agreement is disrespecting this decision and, therefore, the author himself.
- ouid 8y agoWait, what? Amazon is a monopoly. They aren't charging a fair competitive price. Your "argument" only works if the author has other options for distribution. Otherwise it's not a decision.
- tzs 8y agoAmazon doesn't have a monopoly on physical book production or distribution. As the author notes in TFA, he looked at other production options and they were roughly the same as Amazon.
- golergka 8y ago> Amazon is a monopoly. Can you please back up this claim with some data? Certainly doesn't look as a monopoly on book distribution and online book sales from here.