3 ms·
> I feel strongly that Amazon can sell kindles and we're ok, and amazon can sell content and we're ok but having amazon able to sell both kindle and content, an
by rumanator 6y ago
> I feel strongly that Amazon can sell kindles and we're ok, and amazon can sell content and we're ok but having amazon able to sell both kindle and content, and direct IPR outcomes across the platform and the content, is actually pretty bad.
Was anyone doing any of that prior to Amazon's bet on kindle?
- ggm 6y agoWas anyone doing any of that prior to gutenbergs bet on the printing press.. No. Kindle was transformative. But, we do not perpetuate market advantage when things become a social utility, and to say "freedom of choice" when the IPR is not actually equally available on all readers, when Kindle can (and do) delete content from you, when they respect the global national IPR framework but also intrude adverts into the flow...
- rumanator 6y ago> Was anyone doing any of that prior to gutenbergs bet on the printing press.. That comment is disingenuous and outright deceitful. Guttemberg wasn't selling ebooks that downloaded books from an online store. My question was who else offered a similar product to Amazon when Amazon launched Kindle.
- ggm 6y agoDid you read the rest of my comment? It addressed the matter of substance. Ask yourself what other field of a like nature has led to an outcome of this type. Does a Sony VHS only read Sony produced films? Does a Philips CD player only play Dutch cds? Does an iPhone only play iPhone music? Does chrome refuse to show pages for Microsoft? The Kindle imposes a strong wall that (pdf aside) says only Kindle managed epub is routinely available and then imposes constraints on how content is added 'for a better reader experience'