6 ms·
It's a small (but admittedly growing) minority that find this to be a problem. So even then, why begrudge anyone for offering a product or service that someone
by brodouevencode 3y ago
It's a small (but admittedly growing) minority that find this to be a problem.
So even then, why begrudge anyone for offering a product or service that someone wanted at a price both parties considered fair? Users saw value in the service otherwise they wouldn't use them. Is there some sort of mandate that this type of service be used? (If Overdrive is breaking the law or defrauding customers then that's a separate issue.)
- helpfulmandrill 3y ago> why begrudge anyone for offering a product or service that someone wanted at a price both parties considered fair? Because in the context of our quite dysfunctional laws around copyright, competition, DRM etc., this isn't a remotely adequate description of what's going on?
- brodouevencode 3y agoThen that's a problem with the dysfunctional laws and not the company, UNLESS the company is using those dysfunctional laws to enable their market capture. Do you know if Overdrive is doing this? If so then it's fair to criticize their market capture because it was done with the power of the state (point of a gun). If they are not it's obviously some sort of derangement. I find the tendency to make private companies and people - those who are playing fair - the bad guys in these scenarios extremely abhorrent. Let's fix the laws.
- phyllistine 3y agoYou're right, we should fix the laws. The companies actions under the ownership of KKR should not be considered 'playing fair', and some corporate buyout laws should be changed to disallow this behavior, maybe by enforcing the anti monopoly protections that the US has on the books. Alternatively, we could make DRM illegal to make the market more competitive.